Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#161
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
keithr wrote: "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... keithr wrote: snip irelevants, To change the situation, Peter Stein should produce manuals for sale, and give all schematics and explanations and include the simple methods of matching the transistors. There certainly should be a manual available at a reasonable price, but this is one of the problems with boutique manufacturers, they can't usually afford a technical writer to do the job, and the last person that you want doing it is the designer. Wrong. sorry but I have to disagree as someone who has been there and done that. Peter Stein has once appeared on the news groups to slow up the bull**** stream from Trevor Wilson. Its was not a happy episode. Stein has no trouble typing plain english, and would, like myself, have no trouble whatsover drafting up a comprehensive manual. He would do it better than an employed writer who would, without Peter's knowledge, make a cock up of the manual. You obviously have never participated in a major commercial project. Your observation is correct if you mean something to do with audio gear production. But I would be the same as I am with myself when it comes to demanding unambiguous texts and having plenty of meaning with a minimum of words. There is no Booker Prize for amp manuals. I have see the crap that designers wrote, then the tranformation that a professional technical writer could bring to it. OK, sure, some technical people cannot say a single word without a foot being in their mouth. In my case I could NEVER afford a pro writer. The buck stops here. I am cook, CEO, bottle washer and writer of this little outfit. It is an iterative process that may take a couple of cycles between the designers and the writer to asrrive at something that satisfies everybody, but the result is far better than the designers would do themselves. Edit, Edit, Edit and Edit and ****in Edit. Then finally, it looks OK and has no errors. That's my way. Part of the process is getting the designers to explain their work to someone who knows nothing about the project, that focusses the mind wonderfully Maybe. There is a university student guy in the UK wanting to make a program for winding transformers which will deal with my 63 steps of logic required to make an OPT. He's really struggling with it all to understand what the heck I am on about. He'll be the second student to have a go to automate my logic flow. The first one 3 years ago only got as far as calculating turns and core size for a for a given power and load value. Time ran out for him. I didn't need some dumb & expensive writer **** to write my website and draw up all the schematics. If you cannot and or will not write up your own true story about your productions then something is very wrong. In my experience, few designers do a good job of it. In my view someone who cannot describe their design in a schematic and a few paragraphs and maybe a few formula has not trained himself well enough as a communicator. include the simple methods of matching the transistors. Far better to design curcuits that do not require component matching to within 1% People wanting to own an ME 850 amp should get a far better deal than they get now for their $6,000. Yes like $4000 change. Peter Stein doesn't care that his product appeals to only a tiny itzt bitzy weeny percentage of ppl. He must think he can "hang out" for the big price. However, I could also be accused of charging too much per watt. But the work I do for $6,000 is vastly more than whatever Peter Stein does. Any SS amp is child's play to make compared to a serious tube amp. Why? Well, for example, consider the last pair of monoblocs with 2 x 845 in parallel for 60 watts into 4 ohms. There are two complex PTs, and two complex OPTs, same size, 51mm tongue, x 72mm stack GOSS. Thousands of well placed turns with correct insulation and the PT has 48 connections, OPT has 24 connections. Many taps and windings. It takes a week to make just one tranny. There is all the custome metal work for 4 chassis, two for two PSUs, two larger for two amp chassis. There are a total of 6 chokes for each channel, and on each amp chassis there is a hand crafted heatsink to cool resistors producing over 50 watts of heat without becoming hot, so I have 36 square cm of aluminium area per watt. Everything is hand wired onto hand made terminal strips. Several weeks of design work are required for every set of amps I make. Then there is a the tweaking and OPT gap adjustment, and potting of all OPT and PT with sand and resin. The 4 chokes used for the two pairs of choke input dc supplies for 3.5A to the 845 heaters are also potted in sand/resin mix to ensure their silence. Then comes the metalwork for the covers over the transformers on the amp chassis. Then grilles and gurds to stop tube breakage. These items are tough, but carefully made, so that if the amp falls off a table it won't bend in half. Total weight is 85 Kgs split into 4 chassis. Special rugged umbilical cables have been made using mobile crane cables. There is the active protection board in each amp chassis to guard against tube failure or excessive cathode current. There is the paintwork of the chassis covers and grilles, drilled out guard plates around tubes, and bottom plates and drilling out for ventilations. I do it all without any help, except this time I had a metalworker bend up my steel chassis and weld it all and make it nice like a Quad-II chassis standard. There isn't anyone I could train who'd settle for becoming an amp worker like me. The wages are way too low. So young men who might like to become some sort of tradesman will choose to be an electrician or plumber, because its easy and very well paid, despite working in bathrooms and toilets, or in rat infested roof areas of houses. Maybe that partially answers your question of 'why'. , Then it depends who you compare me to. Some chinese makers are selling 5050 Watt stereo tube4 amps on-line and direct from the maker without western round eye arsole middlemen for $700. But they are junk, and badly made. I have owned several Japanese SS amps costing 10-20% of an ME and have never had the least trouble with any of them, the only reason that they have been replaced is to get something a little better. Japanese amps, yes, often very good. The Japs discovered that to woo the west they needed to invent better quality than anything made in the west. In the 50s, after WW2, the Jap crap was allowed into Oz, and many hated it because of Japan's attempt to ruin so many lives during the war years. Many liked it though because it was cheaper, had better features, but still was junk anyway. The junk got better and better as the decades rolled on and cars and cameras and some electronics from Japan was pretty **** hot. Not all though, and much stuff for export to Oz was much below domestic quality destined for the locval Jap consumers. But the Chinese have yet to graduate to real quality. Mybe in another 20 years they will realise that their **** stinks just like I know mine does. I'll be gone of course, and won't have to worry what the **** they do. The Real Mccoy is much more expensive. I don't care if you make steam engines forsale. Good luck if you do. But if you didn't have the service information about your engines, i'd be right onto you. If you can't service your own steam engine without help, you shouldn't be owning one. I don't think that Watt had a web site. But you'd need to know all about the engine parts and how they were made and to service it. For example if your steam engine was a 1950 made type 38 express locomotive used on mainline express passenger routes in NSW, a manual would be essential. In such nice old toys, a boiler change isn't so easy to perform. Especially without a huge pre-existing railway yard workshop with dozens of blokes to help out. The local Railway Historical Society has a large articulated Garrat loco, 16 driving wheels, 4 lots of cylinders. They have other simpler locos. They have manuals. Books are kept on work done to each engine. My overwhelming concern in this thread is that Peter Stein and that idiot fool Trevor Wilson fail to see that its necessary to have all constructional information and schematics of their products either available online for free or available as a hard copy workshop service manual for a fee. Trevor accuses me of SHOUTING but he spews mountains of utter lies, bull****, and nothing really informative at all. He has never designed or built an amp in his life, but poses as a know all. The pair of you are as bad as each other. Peronally, I never built a mainframe computer but I was damn good at fixing them mainly because I had a good understanding of the principles involved (and had a complete set of logics). I inform, and teach, and Wilson spews BS about **** all to make himself look good. I don't care how bad I look; I will always have time for the truth about technical issues about which Trevor seems to have almost no idea at all. He cannot even explain the ME amp design in any way whatsoever which makes any sense to anyone. Its all blather, artless posturing for sales and fame, but among the few who do understand technicals, he is a clumsy minded klutz. Trevor used to have a website, http://www.rageaudio.com.au Its under construction. The man cannot even maintain a website any more. There is the ME website at http://www.me-au.com/index.html There is not the slightest bit of technical info. But there is a mention there of the stack of parts Stein has for future productions. So it does seem he purchased gear left over from when his factory and equipment was sold off years ago as a result of a divorce. Perhaps his wife found him rather difficult and stubborn, obsessive, and uncomunicative. I doubt we will ever see a workshop manual, ever. Wilson and Stein seem quite incapable of making sure there are manuals. Patrick Turner. Keith |
#162
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
keithr wrote: "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... "keithr" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... snip, **The output stage uses no feedback loop. All feedback is local only. IOW: Degenerative feedback only. Maybe a little feedback around the output stage would eliminate the need for such close matching without changing the sound, but I suppose that in audio, everybody has to have their own gimmick to differentiate their product. Indeed the mention of no global FB and local only is a gimmick. I have the ME 75 amp schematic in front of me right now. Its the only ME amp schematic I have, aquired before I went online from goodness knows where; must have been from Peter Stein during better times because I recall having to repair an ME 75 with serious faults. The schematic is an untidy mess of thing, and there are no notes. Just what you'd expect from a cowboy outfit. The output stage for a channel has 12 transistors in total, with a type of Sziclai arrangement around the 4 or more output transistors. The Sziclai has two stages, an emitter follower which is arranged with common emitter output pairs to create current to ensure the output voltage follows the input voltage applied to the low power follower input stage. Sziclai stage working is all viewable in Google if a search is done. The input follower does have a low collector resistance and some inverted gain to work the output transistor bases, and their collector current action on the output load creates the NFB voltage applied to the input transistor emitters. Lots of open loop gain, and lots of loop NFB are in action. The input section of the amp has 8 transistors and a damned opamp. It is has basically a symetrical pair of npn and pnp differential pairs paralleled so that there are two inputs, one for input signal, the other for the global loop NFB which Trevor denies exists. Its global NFB around more than one stage, and Trevor Wilson tells lies about a circuit he should know very well. The output of the two diff pairs power a quad of npn and pnp class A series complementary transistors to create the drive to the output stage. I use a very similar drive arrangement in my own amps. http://www.turneraudio.com.au/solids...s1mosfets.html This input topology is fast and has faily low open loop THD of only about 4% without the global NFB. The symetrical input diff amp and Voltage Amp Stage was invented a long long time ago by someone bright spark way ahead of Stein. The ME has global FB from the output of the VAS drive amp fed back to the second input port of the parallel npn and pnp input pairs. A huge amount of global NFB is used to get the VAS distortion low. It would be impossible to combine all the many stages in the driver amp and output amp of the ME, and have one loop of global NFB. The circuit is too complex to ensure stability; ie, it would oscillate badly at HF with so many stages and only one NFB loop. In my amp and so many other designed by such luminaries as Douglas Self and countless others, the amp is kept much simpler than the ME way, and only one loop of global NFB is required. I use mosfets in source follower mode because they are so very easy to drive, and its so very easy to make such a circuit unconditionally stable with ONE good loop of NFB. People should read ...... http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/ampins.htm Douglas Self is a guy who knows at least 40dB more than Wilson will ever know. The dself website is a good example of what ME should have at their ME website. I hope I make myself painfully clear to Wilson and Stein. After all, even with global feedback, I know of no design that takes the feedback loop back to the input of the pre-amp so it is not entirely global even in that case. **The term 'Global NFB' is usually taken to mean that the feedback loop operates from output to input (of the power amp stage). Wrong. There are usually 3 stages in a power amp, input pair/s, VAS, and transconductance output stage. Global NFB is applied around all 3 cascaded stages. But where you have two stages in an input plus VAS arrangement with global NFB around two stages, its global NFB, right!!!! Don't ****ing bull**** to us Wilson! And where you have two stages in the output stage, and global NFB, its global NFB. It should come as no surprise that in fact the NFB applied in ME amps enables the stages to be stabilised quite well against sprurious RF oscillations. Wilson has never been able to explain it properly, as he prefers to sit high upon the bull**** bandwagon, and brag about having "zero global NFB" Having zero global NFB around a coupla stages in SS amps is a complete curse upon the sound. SS amps need all the NFB they can muster. The ME output stage is the one most prone to creating distortions because it operates mainly in class B, and the crossover distortions need to be supressed by NFB action. To avoid noise from the PSU getting into the output stage that has barely enough global NFB, ME use a truckload of capacitors to filter the rails. Not a bad idea, for it gives the FB network less work to do to clean up the noise. The transistor matching also helps, but the FB and Sziclai arrangement has the majority effect, with matching making only a tiny contribution to fidelity. If we consider Quad's 405 "current dumping" amp, the output transistors are arranged so that it is entirely non critical whether they are matched or not, and bias isn't critical either. Does anyone think ME amps sound better than a Quad 405? Did Peter Walker have a few more brains than the guys at ME? Is the Pope a catholic? I understand the emotional attachment Wilson might have for the ME design he undertsands so poorly. Its just a silly emotional attachment. Patrick Turner. Trevor Wilson |
#163
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
roughplanet wrote, while he orgasmed at the thought of amplifiers, Ohhhh..............you'd LOVE the linear amplifier that I have sitting in my shack at the moment Alan, all 3kW of it. Once midnight strikes, I'll turn it on. Hope I don't turn into......PA :-). ruff Er, aim the darn thing away from PA. He's bad enough without RF affecting him as well. Be careful, my 300 watt narrow beam high speed Tewbuctous Ray Destroyer has just passed all tests and can vaporize bull**** at some distance away. Patrick Turner. |
#164
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"keithr" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... "keithr" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... Good transistor amps function perfectly well with wider tolerances than you say because of the abundance of local and other NFB. **"Good" is your term. not mine. I happen to feel that amplifiers which use lots of Golbal NFB are not "good". They are average. Trevor Wilson Speaking as one who has never seen, heard, or even smelled an ME amp perhaps you can clear something up for me. As I understand it the ME is made up of several modules in the signal path. Each of these modules has it's own feedback loop. **Not quite. The amplifier is not all that complex. It is pretty standard, full complementary symmetry thoughout, dual differential inputs, with the obligatory active current sources. The Voltage amplifier stage uses around 15dB of Global NFB to stabilise Voltage gain to the desired level. The Voltage amp feeds the current amplifier, which uses local feedback only (no loop, from output back to input). The output devices are coupled to the load via the collectors, rather than the more usual emitter follower configuration. So, no, each module does not have it's own feedback loop. Only the Voltage amp has a feedback loop. Assuming that the module and it's feedback path are correctly designed and thus pass an undistorted signal to the next downstream module, why does this require such tight tolerancing in the output stage? **Because there is no loop feedback around the output stage. Additionally, the feedback that does operate, is lightly applied. I do assume that the ouput stage module has it's own feedback loop and is being fed an undistorted signal. **The output stage uses no feedback loop. All feedback is local only. IOW: Degenerative feedback only. Maybe a little feedback around the output stage would eliminate the need for such close matching without changing the sound, but I suppose that in audio, everybody has to have their own gimmick to differentiate their product. **There's the rub. Peter Stein did build some sample amps which used some Global NFB. Distortion was reduced (from what was already an inaudible level) and it would have reduced the dependence on matched devices. HOWEVER, blind testing showed that most listeners preferred the zero Global NFB approach. I was one of those listeners. I received two, otherwise identical, amplifiers. I was asked to judge which I preferred over a period of several weeks. I was not told what differences there were, nor what to expect. Whilst the differences were not earth-shattering, they were obvious. Trevor Wilson |
#165
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
"Phil Allison" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" **Correct. Just to recap: I don't attempt to match transistors for ME repairs. I buy them from Peter. I merely listed the above tests to show that transistors vary wildly in Hfe. ** You have shown no such thing with a meaningless test with that unsuitable " Peak " meter - which is clearly intended for small signal devices. The Hfe of high power BJTs typically falls off sharply below 100mA Ic. The very same group of MJ15003s will likely test very close in Hfe at an Ic of 250mA or more. **Indeed. I made that very point earlier. For matching output devices in an output stage, it is important to match at suitably high currents. I am still waiting to find out if that is how Mouser match their devices. Here are some more results form my own stock. The first column are some devices (MJ15004) tested at 1 Amp (by Peter Stein). The second column at around 4ma (the Peak tester): 81 79 89 85 80 77 74 71 81 77 85 81 From the above, we can see that you are correct. The gain is lower at lower currents. Importantly, however, the gain difference appears to be similar across all the devices. IOW: Although not an accurate indicator of Hfe at high currents, a low current measurement may provide a rough approximation. Which is what I was attempting to demonstrate. Trevor Wilson ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
#166
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... keithr wrote: "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... keithr wrote: snip irelevants, To change the situation, Peter Stein should produce manuals for sale, and give all schematics and explanations and include the simple methods of matching the transistors. There certainly should be a manual available at a reasonable price, but this is one of the problems with boutique manufacturers, they can't usually afford a technical writer to do the job, and the last person that you want doing it is the designer. Wrong. sorry but I have to disagree as someone who has been there and done that. Peter Stein has once appeared on the news groups to slow up the bull**** stream from Trevor Wilson. Its was not a happy episode. Stein has no trouble typing plain english, and would, like myself, have no trouble whatsover drafting up a comprehensive manual. He would do it better than an employed writer who would, without Peter's knowledge, make a cock up of the manual. You obviously have never participated in a major commercial project. Your observation is correct if you mean something to do with audio gear production. But I would be the same as I am with myself when it comes to demanding unambiguous texts and having plenty of meaning with a minimum of words. There is no Booker Prize for amp manuals. Quite true but clear, complete and unambiguous texts are very rare from the pens of designers I have see the crap that designers wrote, then the tranformation that a professional technical writer could bring to it. OK, sure, some technical people cannot say a single word without a foot being in their mouth. In my case I could NEVER afford a pro writer. The buck stops here. I am cook, CEO, bottle washer and writer of this little outfit. As I said before, that is one of the problems with boutique manufacturers. It is an iterative process that may take a couple of cycles between the designers and the writer to asrrive at something that satisfies everybody, but the result is far better than the designers would do themselves. Edit, Edit, Edit and Edit and ****in Edit. Then finally, it looks OK and has no errors. That's my way. Part of the process is getting the designers to explain their work to someone who knows nothing about the project, that focusses the mind wonderfully Maybe. There is a university student guy in the UK wanting to make a program for winding transformers which will deal with my 63 steps of logic required to make an OPT. He's really struggling with it all to understand what the heck I am on about. He'll be the second student to have a go to automate my logic flow. The first one 3 years ago only got as far as calculating turns and core size for a for a given power and load value. Time ran out for him. That is the sort of thing that I do for a living, you get a requirement from the originator of the project. It may be a comprehensive specification or just a few words, you check that it makes sense, going back to the originator if needs be to come to an agreement on something that is suitable to automate and meets their needs. You then break the task down into steps each being an independant task which preferably can be easily verified during the design and coding process, then you code it. You run as many test as you can to verify and debug the program, then give it back to the originator to try and destroy. I looked at your stuff in regard to the push pull case, there doesn't seem to be any rocket science there, but I am surprised that you don't mention bifilar winding which we always used to consider the "Proper" way of winding PP transformer primaries as it assures perfect matching betweem the sides. Harder to wind I have to admit. I didn't need some dumb & expensive writer **** to write my website and draw up all the schematics. If you cannot and or will not write up your own true story about your productions then something is very wrong. In my experience, few designers do a good job of it. In my view someone who cannot describe their design in a schematic and a few paragraphs and maybe a few formula has not trained himself well enough as a communicator. That may be true (at least in some cases) on something as simple as an audio amp, but it certainly hs not been true of any number of complex projects that I have been involved in. Hell, it isn't even true of a service manual for a TV set. include the simple methods of matching the transistors. Far better to design curcuits that do not require component matching to within 1% People wanting to own an ME 850 amp should get a far better deal than they get now for their $6,000. Yes like $4000 change. Peter Stein doesn't care that his product appeals to only a tiny itzt bitzy weeny percentage of ppl. He must think he can "hang out" for the big price. However, I could also be accused of charging too much per watt. But the work I do for $6,000 is vastly more than whatever Peter Stein does. Any SS amp is child's play to make compared to a serious tube amp. Why? Well, for example, consider the last pair of monoblocs with 2 x 845 in parallel for 60 watts into 4 ohms. There are two complex PTs, and two complex OPTs, same size, 51mm tongue, x 72mm stack GOSS. Thousands of well placed turns with correct insulation and the PT has 48 connections, OPT has 24 connections. Many taps and windings. It takes a week to make just one tranny. That is only because you choose to make your own tranformers. There are a number of reputable manufacturers who have a range of products that would meet most requirements, and, if you cost your time, no more expensive either. It is beyond me why anybody would even want to design/manufacture their own power transformer, when there is such an array available on the market. Personally, I'd want to use a torriod anyway and they would be a ******* to wind without the proper machinary There is all the custome metal work for 4 chassis, two for two PSUs, two larger for two amp chassis. Chasssis work is as complex as you care to make it. If I were making a tube amp, I think that I'd make a wooden frame for the sides with a polished or anodised duralumin top plate carrying the circuitry. Looks nice and is dead easy to make. A SS amp would require nearly as much metal bashing as a tube model. There are a total of 6 chokes for each channel, and on each amp chassis there is a hand crafted heatsink to cool resistors producing over 50 watts of heat without becoming hot, so I have 36 square cm of aluminium area per watt. I can see no reason at all for making chokes. They are very rarely critical components, off the shelf products will do an excellent job 99% of the time.SS amps require more extensive heatsinking that any tube amp that I have ever come across Everything is hand wired onto hand made terminal strips. With an SS amp you either have exactly the same amount of wiring, or more usually you are up for the design and manufacture of a PCB or PCBs and then stuffing the components onto that. Several weeks of design work are required for every set of amps I make. Then there is a the tweaking and OPT gap adjustment, and potting of all OPT and PT with sand and resin. The 4 chokes used for the two pairs of choke input dc supplies for 3.5A to the 845 heaters are also potted in sand/resin mix to ensure their silence. Then comes the metalwork for the covers over the transformers on the amp chassis. Then grilles and gurds to stop tube breakage. These items are tough, but carefully made, so that if the amp falls off a table it won't bend in half. Total weight is 85 Kgs split into 4 chassis. If a 20odd Kg chassis fell of the table, I'd be worried about the floor. You bring up a major advantage of SS gear, you could build the equivalent at a quarter or less weight. Special rugged umbilical cables have been made using mobile crane cables. There is the active protection board in each amp chassis to guard against tube failure or excessive cathode current. Same protection requirement for SS amps There is the paintwork of the chassis covers and grilles, drilled out guard plates around tubes, and bottom plates and drilling out for ventilations. Just the same for a SS amp. I do it all without any help, except this time I had a metalworker bend up my steel chassis and weld it all and make it nice like a Quad-II chassis standard. There isn't anyone I could train who'd settle for becoming an amp worker like me. The wages are way too low. So young men who might like to become some sort of tradesman will choose to be an electrician or plumber, because its easy and very well paid, despite working in bathrooms and toilets, or in rat infested roof areas of houses. Or become a programmer, the pay is good, the work is light (physically anyway) but you do have to be mentally alert, be willing to think outside the box, and relearn large chunks of your trade every few years. Maybe that partially answers your question of 'why'. As I have noted above, I don't think that it is any more complex than designing and making a SS amp. You do choose to do many things the hard way, and I am unconvinced that that makes the result significantly better, certainly not in proportion to the effort involved Then it depends who you compare me to. Some chinese makers are selling 5050 Watt stereo tube4 amps on-line and direct from the maker without western round eye arsole middlemen for $700. But they are junk, and badly made. I have owned several Japanese SS amps costing 10-20% of an ME and have never had the least trouble with any of them, the only reason that they have been replaced is to get something a little better. Japanese amps, yes, often very good. The Japs discovered that to woo the west they needed to invent better quality than anything made in the west. I worked for the Japanese for 16 years and visited Japan maybe a dozen times in that period, my assessment was that they aren't good at thinking up new ideas, but give them a start and they will take it to it's logical conclusion. The Japanese home market demands absolute quality, nobody but the poorest would even contemplate buying seconds or rejects, outlet stores were unknown there last time I visited 10 years ago. Electronics of the same model as is current here can often be found there at knockdown prices because they are no longer the latest model and nobody (other than foreigners) want them. Everbody interested in any form of electronics should visit Akihabara at least once in their life. It is jaw dropping both for the range of stuff available and the prices In the 50s, after WW2, the Jap crap was allowed into Oz, and many hated it because of Japan's attempt to ruin so many lives during the war years. Many liked it though because it was cheaper, had better features, but still was junk anyway. The japs only learned to solder in the late 60s, before that a standard 8 transistor radio would have a complete roll of multicore in it and about 50 dry joints The junk got better and better as the decades rolled on and cars and cameras and some electronics from Japan was pretty **** hot. By the 80s their quality was the best in the world. Not all though, and much stuff for export to Oz was much below domestic quality destined for the locval Jap consumers. But the Chinese have yet to graduate to real quality. Mybe in another 20 years they will realise that their **** stinks just like I know mine does. I'll be gone of course, and won't have to worry what the **** they do. The Real Mccoy is much more expensive. I don't care if you make steam engines forsale. Good luck if you do. But if you didn't have the service information about your engines, i'd be right onto you. If you can't service your own steam engine without help, you shouldn't be owning one. I don't think that Watt had a web site. But you'd need to know all about the engine parts and how they were made and to service it. For example if your steam engine was a 1950 made type 38 express locomotive used on mainline express passenger routes in NSW, a manual would be essential. In such nice old toys, a boiler change isn't so easy to perform. Especially without a huge pre-existing railway yard workshop with dozens of blokes to help out. The local Railway Historical Society has a large articulated Garrat loco, 16 driving wheels, 4 lots of cylinders. They have other simpler locos. They have manuals. Books are kept on work done to each engine. Yep, I have seen it run, even ridden behind it. I have never seen a manual for a steam loco, I was under the impression that the knowledge to fix them was just passed down from generation to generation. It seemed that way when my father worked on the railways. When I have my house sorted out, I may join the Dorrego steam museum and help restore some of the huge number of old pieces of machinary that they own. It was great as a kid having a father on the railway, I got to ride on the footplate of steam locos and all sorts of cool things I inform, and teach, and Wilson spews BS about **** all to make himself look good. I don't care how bad I look; I will always have time for the truth about technical issues about which Trevor seems to have almost no idea at all. As I said before, that is your hobby. I have no idea what TW does with his spare time other than to post here. As a fixer of audio gear, I don't think that he has any obligation to explain stuff, only to be accurate when he does choose to make statements. I just wish that either you two would come to some agreement or else to ignore each other, the same crap repeated ad nauseum is quite boring. He cannot even explain the ME amp design in any way whatsoever which makes any sense to anyone. Its all blather, artless posturing for sales and fame, but among the few who do understand technicals, he is a clumsy minded klutz. Trevor used to have a website, http://www.rageaudio.com.au Its under construction. The man cannot even maintain a website any more. Does he even want/need one? There is the ME website at http://www.me-au.com/index.html Not the most informative site and it contradicts itself on the availability of the ME850HC, but it is about what I'd expect from a semi dead company. There is not the slightest bit of technical info. But there is a mention there of the stack of parts Stein has for future productions. So it does seem he purchased gear left over from when his factory and equipment was sold off years ago as a result of a divorce. Perhaps his wife found him rather difficult and stubborn, obsessive, and uncomunicative. I doubt we will ever see a workshop manual, ever. If you ain't seen it by now, I can't see any likelyhood of seeing it in the future. Keith |
#167
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
"Trevor Wilson"
"Phil Allison" ** You have shown no such thing with a meaningless test with that unsuitable " Peak " meter - which is clearly intended for small signal devices. The Hfe of high power BJTs typically falls off sharply below 100mA Ic. The very same group of MJ15003s will likely test very close in Hfe at an Ic of 250mA or more. **Indeed. I made that very point earlier. For matching output devices in an output stage, it is important to match at suitably high currents. I am still waiting to find out if that is how Mouser match their devices. Here are some more results form my own stock. The first column are some devices (MJ15004) tested at 1 Amp (by Peter Stein). The second column at around 4ma (the Peak tester): 81 79 89 85 80 77 74 71 81 77 85 81 From the above, we can see that you are correct. The gain is lower at lower currents. Importantly, however, the gain difference appears to be similar across all the devices. IOW: Although not an accurate indicator of Hfe at high currents, a low current measurement may provide a rough approximation. Which is what I was attempting to demonstrate. ** Completely **False ** demonstration - the fallacy of picking your examples to suit your claim. OK: That Peak tester you use tests Hfe at 2.5 mA (according to the published specs) and at around 2.5 volt Vce - so is easily duplicated . http://www.peakelec.co.uk/acatalog/jz_dca55.html (See note 2. ) OTOH - my "Simple Power Transistor Tester" operates at 500mA and 6 volt Vce. I picked 3 x TO3 NPNs at random: Hfe test: SPTT Peak MJ15003#1 89 13 MJ15003#2 92 9 MJ802 175 39 So, low current testing of high power BJTs gives grossly WRONG answers. It is complete ******** !! Get yourself a proper power BJT tester - anytime. ....... Phil |
#168
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
keithr wrote: "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... keithr wrote: "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... snip, I mentioned...... He'll be the second student to have a go to automate my logic flow. The first one 3 years ago only got as far as calculating turns and core size for a for a given power and load value. Time ran out for him. That is the sort of thing that I do for a living, you get a requirement from the originator of the project. It may be a comprehensive specification or just a few words, you check that it makes sense, going back to the originator if needs be to come to an agreement on something that is suitable to automate and meets their needs. You then break the task down into steps each being an independant task which preferably can be easily verified during the design and coding process, then you code it. You run as many test as you can to verify and debug the program, then give it back to the originator to try and destroy. I looked at your stuff in regard to the push pull case, there doesn't seem to be any rocket science there, but I am surprised that you don't mention bifilar winding which we always used to consider the "Proper" way of winding PP transformer primaries as it assures perfect matching betweem the sides. Harder to wind I have to admit. I think you are very wrong about primaries on PP OPT. First of all, bifiliar windings of any type are a nightamre of difficulty for the average diyer or boutique maker. Second, I have NEVER found any reason to wind bifilar or trifilar windings anywhere. Thirdly, if bililar or trifilar windings are ever used, ideally the dc potentials should be equal on all windings concerned. But the ac potentials also MUST be equal to avoid a high amount of unwanted shunt capacitance between two lots of say 500 plus turns each of say 0.4mm dia wire. McIntosh do bililar PP primaries, and the ac potentials are equal between one tube's cathode winding and the other's anode winding ans vice versa. But the windings have 470Vdc between them, and to prevent shorts and arcs the wire is grade 3 insulation, ie, has much thicker enamel coating than grade 2 standard high temp winding wire. The bifilar windings give extremely low leakage inductance between the two windings but very high shunt C, and thus a low Fo for the set of windings. Follow all my ways of winding OPT and you will hace a recipe which is equal to all the best makers on the planet. Fourthly, The bifilar P windings might give equal winding resistance to each PP side. But the normal way its done is to use TWO bobbins, one for each 1/2 primary. Williamson specified this in 1947, and the complete recipe is in RDH4. But its a terribly difficult thing to wind just for the sake of having equal Rw per PP side. In a typical PP amp with a 5k : 5ohm OPT, winding Rw of the whole P should be no more than 2.5% of the P load, ie, 125 ohms. So you could end up with say 55 ohms on one side, and 70 ohms on the other. The difference of 25 ohms makes an extremely tiny effect on THD/IMD. You could place a 100 ohm R in series between one anode and its OPT connection and see virtually no easily measurable difference in technical performance. The amp will sound exactly the same. I believe my OPT methods are the best easy and effective way to get Motzart through glassware without upsetting his hairstyle. I didn't need some dumb & expensive writer **** to write my website and draw up all the schematics. If you cannot and or will not write up your own true story about your productions then something is very wrong. In my experience, few designers do a good job of it. In my view someone who cannot describe their design in a schematic and a few paragraphs and maybe a few formula has not trained himself well enough as a communicator. That may be true (at least in some cases) on something as simple as an audio amp, but it certainly hs not been true of any number of complex projects that I have been involved in. Hell, it isn't even true of a service manual for a TV set. The designer needs to be able to convey what he wants to those who hate to think, and just turn up at work to do the least they can to avoid the sack and still take home the money. include the simple methods of matching the transistors. Far better to design curcuits that do not require component matching to within 1% People wanting to own an ME 850 amp should get a far better deal than they get now for their $6,000. Yes like $4000 change. Peter Stein doesn't care that his product appeals to only a tiny itzt bitzy weeny percentage of ppl. He must think he can "hang out" for the big price. However, I could also be accused of charging too much per watt. But the work I do for $6,000 is vastly more than whatever Peter Stein does. Any SS amp is child's play to make compared to a serious tube amp. Why? Well, for example, consider the last pair of monoblocs with 2 x 845 in parallel for 60 watts into 4 ohms. There are two complex PTs, and two complex OPTs, same size, 51mm tongue, x 72mm stack GOSS. Thousands of well placed turns with correct insulation and the PT has 48 connections, OPT has 24 connections. Many taps and windings. It takes a week to make just one tranny. That is only because you choose to make your own tranformers. There are a number of reputable manufacturers who have a range of products that would meet most requirements, and, if you cost your time, no more expensive either. It is beyond me why anybody would even want to design/manufacture their own power transformer, when there is such an array available on the market. Personally, I'd want to use a torriod anyway and they would be a ******* to wind without the proper machinary Makers of diyer amps can select a range of PTs for all the different voltages I place on just ONE PT. There are no available CHEAP sources of iron-wound components wound to my standards anywhere. I MUST wind all my own everything. If I bought from say Sowter, or Lundahl or Plitron et all, the cost would be horrendous, and that's a wage i don't earn. There is all the custome metal work for 4 chassis, two for two PSUs, two larger for two amp chassis. Chasssis work is as complex as you care to make it. If I were making a tube amp, I think that I'd make a wooden frame for the sides with a polished or anodised duralumin top plate carrying the circuitry. Looks nice and is dead easy to make. A SS amp would require nearly as much metal bashing as a tube model. The timber has to be 40mm thick and hardwood and made very well to avoid becoming a mass of splinters in a minor fall. Anodized Al is fine, but you have to be extremely careful. Anything goes for diyer, but for something I sell, the standard is non combustible materials and all steel. Its stronger, and cheaper than the timber/Al method, and it takes up less room. There are a total of 6 chokes for each channel, and on each amp chassis there is a hand crafted heatsink to cool resistors producing over 50 watts of heat without becoming hot, so I have 36 square cm of aluminium area per watt. I can see no reason at all for making chokes. They are very rarely critical components, off the shelf products will do an excellent job 99% of the time.SS amps require more extensive heatsinking that any tube amp that I have ever come across Then if you don't like chokes, don't use them. While you are at it, dispense with the tubes entirely, and bundle a few transistors into a box with a generic PT and a few caps, and if you had an uncle, his name might be Bob. But I like chokes AND large amounts of capacitiance. Each 845 amp has 14 x 470uF x 400 V rated electros in the B+ and B- supplies. Plus two x 4H chokes, plus some series 100 ohm R to avoid resonances and get splendid filtering with only a few mV ripple in each rail. This is extremely important in an SE amp where there is no CMRR in the output or driver stage. And there is only 8dB of global NFB. Rout with this FB = 0.33 ohms. Without global NFB its about 0.9 ohms. Everything is hand wired onto hand made terminal strips. With an SS amp you either have exactly the same amount of wiring, or more usually you are up for the design and manufacture of a PCB or PCBs and then stuffing the components onto that. All much easier and faster, but the wiring up of an SE amp isn't the large part of the work. Several weeks of design work are required for every set of amps I make. Then there is a the tweaking and OPT gap adjustment, and potting of all OPT and PT with sand and resin. The 4 chokes used for the two pairs of choke input dc supplies for 3.5A to the 845 heaters are also potted in sand/resin mix to ensure their silence. Then comes the metalwork for the covers over the transformers on the amp chassis. Then grilles and gurds to stop tube breakage. These items are tough, but carefully made, so that if the amp falls off a table it won't bend in half. Total weight is 85 Kgs split into 4 chassis. If a 20odd Kg chassis fell of the table, I'd be worried about the floor. I'd be very worried if it falls onto a clients foot, or a sleeping cat, or very concerned if it it falls onto the tail of a dozy Dobberman. BOWSY WOWSY I bite your leg off maybe. Such amps could fall through a timber floor onto occupants having a meal at the dining table below. Not my REAL concern though. Its all their fault that sort of thing. bring up a major advantage of SS gear, you could build the equivalent at a quarter or less weight. Special rugged umbilical cables have been made using mobile crane cables. There is the active protection board in each amp chassis to guard against tube failure or excessive cathode current. Same protection requirement for SS amps There is the paintwork of the chassis covers and grilles, drilled out guard plates around tubes, and bottom plates and drilling out for ventilations. Just the same for a SS amp. I do it all without any help, except this time I had a metalworker bend up my steel chassis and weld it all and make it nice like a Quad-II chassis standard. There isn't anyone I could train who'd settle for becoming an amp worker like me. The wages are way too low. So young men who might like to become some sort of tradesman will choose to be an electrician or plumber, because its easy and very well paid, despite working in bathrooms and toilets, or in rat infested roof areas of houses. Or become a programmer, the pay is good, the work is light (physically anyway) but you do have to be mentally alert, be willing to think outside the box, and relearn large chunks of your trade every few years. Maybe that partially answers your question of 'why'. As I have noted above, I don't think that it is any more complex than designing and making a SS amp. Man, how many 60 watt SET amps have you ever made? Its not until you have made a pair of 300W SS amps and a pair of 60W SET thinges that you really learn that at least 3 times the time is needed for the tube amps, and even if you just buy a motely collection of trannies and chokes made by Hammond, the costs will be twice that of the SS amp. Cost and time per watt for SET amps is enormous. But if you wanted 3,000 watts in PP Ab2 then a tube amp begins to catch up with the SS amp, unless its a switching amp, or PWM. You do choose to do many things the hard way, and I am unconvinced that that makes the result significantly better, certainly not in proportion to the effort involved People here like the difference, and will pay for it. Then it depends who you compare me to. Some chinese makers are selling 5050 Watt stereo tube4 amps on-line and direct from the maker without western round eye arsole middlemen for $700. But they are junk, and badly made. I have owned several Japanese SS amps costing 10-20% of an ME and have never had the least trouble with any of them, the only reason that they have been replaced is to get something a little better. Japanese amps, yes, often very good. The Japs discovered that to woo the west they needed to invent better quality than anything made in the west. I worked for the Japanese for 16 years and visited Japan maybe a dozen times in that period, my assessment was that they aren't good at thinking up new ideas, but give them a start and they will take it to it's logical conclusion. The Japanese home market demands absolute quality, nobody but the poorest would even contemplate buying seconds or rejects, outlet stores were unknown there last time I visited 10 years ago. Electronics of the same model as is current here can often be found there at knockdown prices because they are no longer the latest model and nobody (other than foreigners) want them. Everbody interested in any form of electronics should visit Akihabara at least once in their life. It is jaw dropping both for the range of stuff available and the prices Indeed... People here buy second hand jap cars with low miles..... In the 50s, after WW2, the Jap crap was allowed into Oz, and many hated it because of Japan's attempt to ruin so many lives during the war years. Many liked it though because it was cheaper, had better features, but still was junk anyway. The japs only learned to solder in the late 60s, before that a standard 8 transistor radio would have a complete roll of multicore in it and about 50 dry joints The junk got better and better as the decades rolled on and cars and cameras and some electronics from Japan was pretty **** hot. By the 80s their quality was the best in the world. Not all though, and much stuff for export to Oz was much below domestic quality destined for the locval Jap consumers. But the Chinese have yet to graduate to real quality. Mybe in another 20 years they will realise that their **** stinks just like I know mine does. I'll be gone of course, and won't have to worry what the **** they do. The Real Mccoy is much more expensive. I don't care if you make steam engines forsale. Good luck if you do. But if you didn't have the service information about your engines, i'd be right onto you. If you can't service your own steam engine without help, you shouldn't be owning one. I don't think that Watt had a web site. But you'd need to know all about the engine parts and how they were made and to service it. For example if your steam engine was a 1950 made type 38 express locomotive used on mainline express passenger routes in NSW, a manual would be essential. In such nice old toys, a boiler change isn't so easy to perform. Especially without a huge pre-existing railway yard workshop with dozens of blokes to help out. The local Railway Historical Society has a large articulated Garrat loco, 16 driving wheels, 4 lots of cylinders. They have other simpler locos. They have manuals. Books are kept on work done to each engine. Yep, I have seen it run, even ridden behind it. I have never seen a manual for a steam loco, I was under the impression that the knowledge to fix them was just passed down from generation to generation. Dig deep, and there will be a large set of drawings and a specification. It seemed that way when my father worked on the railways. When I have my house sorted out, I may join the Dorrego steam museum and help restore some of the huge number of old pieces of machinary that they own. It was great as a kid having a father on the railway, I got to ride on the footplate of steam locos and all sorts of cool things I inform, and teach, and Wilson spews BS about **** all to make himself look good. I don't care how bad I look; I will always have time for the truth about technical issues about which Trevor seems to have almost no idea at all. As I said before, that is your hobby. I have no idea what TW does with his spare time other than to post here. As a fixer of audio gear, I don't think that he has any obligation to explain stuff, only to be accurate when he does choose to make statements. I just wish that either you two would come to some agreement or else to ignore each other, the same crap repeated ad nauseum is quite boring. Anyone coming to the news group posing as some commercial operator and knowall must not act like a fool. I will give them a very torrid painful time if they behave like fools. Its ironic that Trevor Wilson told the group I cannot tolerate fools for longer than 1 second. I don't toloerate his lies, bull****, and plain woeful articulation of any technical aspect of engineering. He cannot even explain the ME amp design in any way whatsoever which makes any sense to anyone. Its all blather, artless posturing for sales and fame, but among the few who do understand technicals, he is a clumsy minded klutz. Trevor used to have a website, http://www.rageaudio.com.au Its under construction. The man cannot even maintain a website any more. Does he even want/need one? I don't have a clue. He did have a site, and there was no demonstration within its conetnt that he knew very much at all. There is the ME website at http://www.me-au.com/index.html Not the most informative site and it contradicts itself on the availability of the ME850HC, but it is about what I'd expect from a semi dead company. The un-dead walk amoung us.... There is not the slightest bit of technical info. But there is a mention there of the stack of parts Stein has for future productions. So it does seem he purchased gear left over from when his factory and equipment was sold off years ago as a result of a divorce. Perhaps his wife found him rather difficult and stubborn, obsessive, and uncomunicative. I doubt we will ever see a workshop manual, ever. If you ain't seen it by now, I can't see any likelyhood of seeing it in the future. But they deseve the negative publicity. I'd take a similar club to Bruce Candy of Halcro if he ever dared show his face on the groups and try to tell us all there was no need for a workshop manual. That's why most CEOs and VIPs in the world of audio manufacturing avoid the news groups like the plague. They will deservedly get told they are arsoles because of their gross shortcomings, over pricing, false claims, and utter BS, and will be asked what time next week will it be when the problems have been fixed. They don't like the blow torch. Patrick Turner. Keith |
#169
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. .. "roughplanet" wrote in message "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... I never read what Trevor says about ME amps or the way transistors are matched because its all empty sales talk and utter BS. Is device matching more important in a power amp that lacks loop feedback? Unequivocally yes! **Read the above very carefully. THIS is exactly what I am talking about. Every tech on the planet claims to know more about ME amplifiers than Peter Stein does. They WILL NOT fit critically matched devices, even when specifically instructed to do so. They will always take the easy (cheap) way out. As a consequence, the performance and reliability of the product will suffer. I know. I've seen the messes that have been created by second rate techs, who think they know it all. Sounds like a believable story. To someone as thick as two short planks I'm sure it does. Long on childish name-calling, short on relevant facts. Where did you get your EE from, a cereal box? ;-) Says the person who inferred that TT was a paedophile to score a point. Pot, kettle black Arnie. All the schematics in the world will not help, as long as techs think they know more than Peter does about his own product. Well, they think that he is being hypercautious. We've seen people like this on this thread. I know, from my own experience, that some high Global NFB products benefit from the use of matched devices. In a product with no Global NFB, the importance of matching becomes far more crucial. Agreed. Gawd TW, You have dug yourself a hole so deep that you will never get out of it now, no matter what. More mouth than brains! Ahh.....the emergence of the Krooborg from his hole in the ground. Church finish early this evening Arnie? No comment Arnie? Why not go away & have a good think about the logic, or rather, the lack of it in what you have said, and then come back & TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH & ONLY THE TRUTH to the other members of this group. If irony killed! You'd be dead, dead, dead. More childish name-calling, still no relevant technical comments. And what relevant technical comments are called for to describe TW's feeble attempt to 'baffle with BS'? He's obviously got you fooled, so your grasp of technical facts can't be too crash hot. You will gain at least some respect; more than if you just keep banging away at the same old gong, which is now badly dented & in need of replacing. I don't think that Trevor is infallible and have crossed swords with him many times. But, when Trevor is right like this, Trevor deserves respect, not the derision of fools. And who are you that your opinion, and that's all you have to offer, is correct? Just a graduate engineer with 40 years of relevant experience. Graduate from where exactly Arnie, and what type of engineering? I ask only out of curiosity, given that the credibility of US university qualifications varies from high to appalling. Which end do yours come from? Trevor ISN'T right. On the technical point, he is. No he's not. He hasn't provided one single shred of hard evidence to substantiate his claims regarding ME amplifiers. Why? Because there isn't any available, or at least, none that either he or PS are prepared to make public. He's just a BS artiste trying to sell something that died several years ago but won't lie down. That's a different issue. That's THE issue here Arnie. If you'd bothered to follow this thread from its inception, you'd see that it was about tube amplification, something TW knows very little about. The very mention of SET amplifiers causes a rush of blood so forceful that he can't control his negative reactions & immediately begins to rubbish the piece of equipment under discussion, never mind the fact that he's never even heard it. A bit like yourself. Perhaps that's why you have jumped to his defence, but only when I gave him some stick. You might even think I'm an easy mark Arnie, but I built my first amplifier in 1958, using KT88's. I still have it. A bit rough, sure, but I was only 14 years old. I think they refer to that as an 'early adopter'. How can you comment on something you know absolutely nothing about? You've shown me how? ;-) Now who's using childish replies? Once again, pot, kettle, balck. Have you ever even seen an ME amp, much less owned one? I don't need to own a zero loop FB SS amp to know something of their care and feeding. Then you haven't been reading anything TW has said. His claim is that ME amplifiers require such careful maintenance that only he &/or PS can carry it out! You're all BS and blather Arnie, just like your mate TW. I owned one of these amps Arnie, as well as the then matching preamp, and believe me they were nothing special. That's a different issue. Again, it's not. See above. But TW will no doubt tell you that I owned 'an early model' or some such BS & so my opinion doesn't matter. Given your inability to understand audio technology, your opinion is geneally wrong. Examples? One or two typos or late night mistakes & you turn them into a sweeping generalisation, a bit like PA was so fond of doing. What did he call them.....ahh yes, 'educated guesses'. What do you call them Arnie? We like to call them LIES! But the truth is, as Patrick so rightly says, that both Peter Stein & Trevor Wilson have done very nicely out of ME 'upgrades' & repairs, as without schematics or any other information on which to rely, other technicians have one hand tied behind their back. That's a different issue. No it's not. See above. So put up or shut up Arnie. If you know something we don't, then by all means tell us. Been there, done that. You spit on it. You've never been anywhere, much less do anything. Even that web site of yours that you're so proud of referring to at the drop of a hat was last edited in 2001. No wonder you're siding with TW. His ME amps are 30 years out of date. You must feel totally overwhelmed by his performance :-). If not, better to be thought a fool than open your mouth & prove it. But alas, you're way past the point where anyone believes anything you have to say, a bit like TW. That's your problem. No Arnie, it's yours. Most of the people here won't talk to you, and more the fool me for even bothering. I let you out of the plonk bin in error, so back you go. **Be specific and I will do my best to answer. Nice come back, Trevor! Only to a like-minded knowall like you Arnie. The rest of us can see through his BS, even if you can't. I'm only addressing the technical issue of the need for careful selection of devices in a zero loop NFB amp. That was merely a red herring on TW's part to try & draw the heat from the pasting he was getting for his continued defence of the indefensible. Every fool knows that there is SOME advantage in matching devices in a zero loop NFB amp, but TW is claiming that it's such a difficult task that only PS can do it! What's more, he hasn't even managed to convince anyone (apart from yourself) that ME amps HAVE zero global NFB. I would say that they must have some global NFB, but because there are no schematics or notes of any kind regarding their construction available to techs, no-one knows for sure. Not even TW, I suspect. In closing, I have a nice linear amp on my bench at the moment. Its output is 3 kW. If you're passing, you might like to poke a screwdriver into it. Good night Arnie. ruff |
#170
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
... roughplanet wrote, while he orgasmed at the thought of amplifiers, Ohhhh..............you'd LOVE the linear amplifier that I have sitting in my shack at the moment Alan, all 3kW of it. Once midnight strikes, I'll turn it on. Hope I don't turn into......PA :-). Er, aim the darn thing away from PA. He's bad enough without RF affecting him as well. Be careful, my 300 watt narrow beam high speed Tewbuctous Ray Destroyer has just passed all tests and can vaporize bull**** at some distance away. Whoooops!!! Tripped the ELCB in a flash (literally). Back to the bench :-). ruff |
#171
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"roughplanet" wrote in
message u "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "roughplanet" wrote in message "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... I never read what Trevor says about ME amps or the way transistors are matched because its all empty sales talk and utter BS. Is device matching more important in a power amp that lacks loop feedback? Unequivocally yes! **Read the above very carefully. THIS is exactly what I am talking about. Every tech on the planet claims to know more about ME amplifiers than Peter Stein does. They WILL NOT fit critically matched devices, even when specifically instructed to do so. They will always take the easy (cheap) way out. As a consequence, the performance and reliability of the product will suffer. I know. I've seen the messes that have been created by second rate techs, who think they know it all. Sounds like a believable story. To someone as thick as two short planks I'm sure it does. Long on childish name-calling, short on relevant facts. Says the person who inferred that TT was a paedophile to score a point. Pot, kettle black Arnie. What??? You're really reaching for those childish insults, TT. What geological era are you reaching back into? Were there even dinosaurs on the earth back then? ;-) Where did you get your EE from, a cereal box? ;-) No answer from TT, so we can presume that his technical knowledge of electronics and audio is nil. All the schematics in the world will not help, as long as techs think they know more than Peter does about his own product. Well, they think that he is being hypercautious. We've seen people like this on this thread. I know, from my own experience, that some high Global NFB products benefit from the use of matched devices. In a product with no Global NFB, the importance of matching becomes far more crucial. Agreed. Gawd TW, You have dug yourself a hole so deep that you will never get out of it now, no matter what. More mouth than brains! Ahh.....the emergence of the Krooborg from his hole in the ground. Church finish early this evening Arnie? No comment Arnie? Say something worth commenting, and I will comment on it. Why not go away & have a good think about the logic, or rather, the lack of it in what you have said, and then come back & TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH & ONLY THE TRUTH to the other members of this group. If irony killed! You'd be dead, dead, dead. More childish name-calling, still no relevant technical comments. And what relevant technical comments are called for to describe TW's feeble attempt to 'baffle with BS'? I see no such attempt. I do see a tired little Terry with zero credentials trying to dazzle us with his lame insults. He's obviously got you fooled, so your grasp of technical facts can't be too crash hot. There's no fooling except by you, Terry. You will gain at least some respect; more than if you just keep banging away at the same old gong, which is now badly dented & in need of replacing. I don't think that Trevor is infallible and have crossed swords with him many times. But, when Trevor is right like this, Trevor deserves respect, not the derision of fools. And who are you that your opinion, and that's all you have to offer, is correct? Just a graduate engineer with 40 years of relevant experience. Graduate from where exactly Arnie, Oakland University - please see their web site: http://www.oakland.edu/ and what type of engineering? http://www2.oakland.edu/secs/ECEdept/ I ask only out of curiosity, given that the credibility of US university qualifications varies from high to appalling. Which end do yours come from? Someplace in the top quarter. Trevor ISN'T right. On the technical point, he is. No he's not. Prove it. He hasn't provided one single shred of hard evidence to substantiate his claims regarding ME amplifiers. What Trevor claims about the effects of device matching in amps with zero loop feedback is consistent with general electrical engineering knowlege. I should add that trying to build a high quality amplifier while intentionally avoiding loop feedback is generally considered to be very unwise - there has to be some very powerful explanation for trying to do such a weird thing, and no such explantion is known to exist for audio power amps being used in a common residential setting. Why? Because there isn't any available, or at least, none that either he or PS are prepared to make public. What Trevor claims about superior sonics due to zero loop feedback is total BS, and it is exceptionally easy to show that sonically perfect amplification is fairly easy to provide by common, relatively inexpensive means. Anybody who brags about ever owning a power amp with zero loop feedback is basically advertising that they have paid had cash to fail a publicly-administered intelligence test. BTW Terry, didn't you say that you once owned a ME power amp? ;-) He's just a BS artiste trying to sell something that died several years ago but won't lie down. That's a different issue. That's THE issue here Arnie. Then address it with a technically-sound argument. The device-matching argument goes Trevor's way, the superior sonics issue goes against him. If you'd bothered to follow this thread from its inception, you'd see that it was about tube amplification, something TW knows very little about. I don't think that a person doing audio in the 21st century need know much about tubed amplification, unless perhaps they work in an electronics museum. The very mention of SET amplifiers causes a rush of blood so forceful that he can't control his negative reactions & immediately begins to rubbish the piece of equipment under discussion, never mind the fact that he's never even heard it. Well, I've heard dozens of SET amplifiers. On one occasion where my ears had been fatigued by listening to a bunch of SETs, I found the sound from a credibly-designed PP tubed amp (by Manley) to be a real breath of fresh air. Of course SS rules. A bit like yourself. I've built over a dozen tubed power amps, some scratch designs, some kits. I still own tubed audio gear and occasionally use it. I know why tube technology is best forgotten, out in the real world. Perhaps that's why you have jumped to his defence, but only when I gave him some stick. I have to admit that I find it amusing to watch you wet your pants in public, Terry. I'm close enough to even catch a whiff of the urine. I'll leave the messy clean-up to other. One word for you Terry: Depends. ;-) You might even think I'm an easy mark Arnie, but I built my first amplifier in 1958, using KT88's. Most of us who were using tubes for audio in 1958 learned our lesson. You seem to be hard to teach, Terry. I guess I thus need to remind you about the benefits of Depends. http://www.depend.com/products/products_all.asp I still have it. A bit rough, sure, but I was only 14 years old. I think they refer to that as an 'early adopter'. In 2008, we refer to continued obsession with tubes as being a "poor learner". How can you comment on something you know absolutely nothing about? You've shown me how? ;-) Now who's using childish replies? Once again, pot, kettle, balck. What's a balck, Terry? ;-) Have you ever even seen an ME amp, much less owned one? I don't need to own a zero loop FB SS amp to know something of their care and feeding. Then you haven't been reading anything TW has said. His claim is that ME amplifiers require such careful maintenance that only he &/or PS can carry it out! I didn't read that. Perhaps that was because I read with my eyes, not with my dreams. What I do read is someone pretty well skewering Trevor over device matching procedures. You're all BS and blather Arnie, just like your mate TW. As I said, I've crossed swords with Trevor over the larger issue many times. I'm only addressing the narrow issue of device matching. I owned one of these amps Arnie, as well as the then matching preamp, and believe me they were nothing special. That's a different issue. Again, it's not. See above. As ADD as you seem to be Terry, I'm wasting my breath when I ask you to try to remain focussed. But TW will no doubt tell you that I owned 'an early model' or some such BS & so my opinion doesn't matter. Given your inability to understand audio technology, your opinion is geneally wrong. Examples? The current discussion. One or two typos or late night mistakes & you turn them into a sweeping generalisation, a bit like PA was so fond of doing. What did he call them.....ahh yes, 'educated guesses'. I'm not defending PA, except of course when he's right, which he often is. What do you call them Arnie? We like to call them LIES! Terry, to lie you have to know the truth, and frankly that excuses you from many of your more obvious public follies. But the truth is, as Patrick so rightly says, that both Peter Stein & Trevor Wilson have done very nicely out of ME 'upgrades' & repairs, as without schematics or any other information on which to rely, other technicians have one hand tied behind their back. That's a different issue. No it's not. See above. Do try to get focussed, Terry. Of course if you haven't learned it by the time you are in your 60s, you probably never will. So put up or shut up Arnie. If you know something we don't, then by all means tell us. Been there, done that. You spit on it. You've never been anywhere, much less do anything. Prove it. Even that web site of yours that you're so proud of referring to at the drop of a hat was last edited in 2001. Please be specific, there are two sites, and pages on both prove you wrong. I just want to know which mistake you are making. ;-) No wonder you're siding with TW. His ME amps are 30 years out of date. You must feel totally overwhelmed by his performance :-). Terry, on the larger issue of the technical advisability of ME amps, all I can say is that I'm proud to have never been so stupid as to actually pay hard cash to buy one. Too bad you can't say the same! LOL! If not, better to be thought a fool than open your mouth & prove it. But alas, you're way past the point where anyone believes anything you have to say, a bit like TW. That's your problem. No Arnie, it's yours. Most of the people here won't talk to you, and more the fool me for even bothering. Most of the people here know that I'm often right and will call them up when they aren't. Since they are often in error, I can understand why they don't want to risk trying to correct me. I let you out of the plonk bin in error, so back you go. That allows me to blindside you at will, Terry. Thanks! |
#172
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Arny Krueger" What I do read is someone pretty well skewering Trevor over device matching procedures. ** Merely skewering ???? Thought I had TW well and truly barbequed and ready for public dining. Beware of severe indigestion - but. ...... Phil |
#173
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
roughplanet wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "roughplanet" wrote in message "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... I never read what Trevor says about ME amps or the way transistors are matched because its all empty sales talk and utter BS. Is device matching more important in a power amp that lacks loop feedback? Unequivocally yes! **Read the above very carefully. THIS is exactly what I am talking about. Every tech on the planet claims to know more about ME amplifiers than Peter Stein does. They WILL NOT fit critically matched devices, even when specifically instructed to do so. They will always take the easy (cheap) way out. As a consequence, the performance and reliability of the product will suffer. I know. I've seen the messes that have been created by second rate techs, who think they know it all. Sounds like a believable story. To someone as thick as two short planks I'm sure it does. Long on childish name-calling, short on relevant facts. Where did you get your EE from, a cereal box? ;-) Says the person who inferred that TT was a paedophile to score a point. Pot, kettle black Arnie. All the schematics in the world will not help, as long as techs think they know more than Peter does about his own product. Well, they think that he is being hypercautious. We've seen people like this on this thread. I know, from my own experience, that some high Global NFB products benefit from the use of matched devices. In a product with no Global NFB, the importance of matching becomes far more crucial. Agreed. Gawd TW, You have dug yourself a hole so deep that you will never get out of it now, no matter what. More mouth than brains! Ahh.....the emergence of the Krooborg from his hole in the ground. Church finish early this evening Arnie? No comment Arnie? Why not go away & have a good think about the logic, or rather, the lack of it in what you have said, and then come back & TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH & ONLY THE TRUTH to the other members of this group. If irony killed! You'd be dead, dead, dead. More childish name-calling, still no relevant technical comments. And what relevant technical comments are called for to describe TW's feeble attempt to 'baffle with BS'? He's obviously got you fooled, so your grasp of technical facts can't be too crash hot. You will gain at least some respect; more than if you just keep banging away at the same old gong, which is now badly dented & in need of replacing. I don't think that Trevor is infallible and have crossed swords with him many times. But, when Trevor is right like this, Trevor deserves respect, not the derision of fools. And who are you that your opinion, and that's all you have to offer, is correct? Just a graduate engineer with 40 years of relevant experience. Graduate from where exactly Arnie, and what type of engineering? I ask only out of curiosity, given that the credibility of US university qualifications varies from high to appalling. Which end do yours come from? Trevor ISN'T right. On the technical point, he is. No he's not. He hasn't provided one single shred of hard evidence to substantiate his claims regarding ME amplifiers. Why? Because there isn't any available, or at least, none that either he or PS are prepared to make public. He's just a BS artiste trying to sell something that died several years ago but won't lie down. That's a different issue. That's THE issue here Arnie. If you'd bothered to follow this thread from its inception, you'd see that it was about tube amplification, something TW knows very little about. The very mention of SET amplifiers causes a rush of blood so forceful that he can't control his negative reactions & immediately begins to rubbish the piece of equipment under discussion, never mind the fact that he's never even heard it. A bit like yourself. Perhaps that's why you have jumped to his defence, but only when I gave him some stick. You might even think I'm an easy mark Arnie, but I built my first amplifier in 1958, using KT88's. I still have it. A bit rough, sure, but I was only 14 years old. I think they refer to that as an 'early adopter'. How can you comment on something you know absolutely nothing about? You've shown me how? ;-) Now who's using childish replies? Once again, pot, kettle, balck. Have you ever even seen an ME amp, much less owned one? I don't need to own a zero loop FB SS amp to know something of their care and feeding. Then you haven't been reading anything TW has said. His claim is that ME amplifiers require such careful maintenance that only he &/or PS can carry it out! You're all BS and blather Arnie, just like your mate TW. I owned one of these amps Arnie, as well as the then matching preamp, and believe me they were nothing special. That's a different issue. Again, it's not. See above. But TW will no doubt tell you that I owned 'an early model' or some such BS & so my opinion doesn't matter. Given your inability to understand audio technology, your opinion is geneally wrong. Examples? One or two typos or late night mistakes & you turn them into a sweeping generalisation, a bit like PA was so fond of doing. What did he call them.....ahh yes, 'educated guesses'. What do you call them Arnie? We like to call them LIES! But the truth is, as Patrick so rightly says, that both Peter Stein & Trevor Wilson have done very nicely out of ME 'upgrades' & repairs, as without schematics or any other information on which to rely, other technicians have one hand tied behind their back. That's a different issue. No it's not. See above. So put up or shut up Arnie. If you know something we don't, then by all means tell us. Been there, done that. You spit on it. You've never been anywhere, much less do anything. Even that web site of yours that you're so proud of referring to at the drop of a hat was last edited in 2001. No wonder you're siding with TW. His ME amps are 30 years out of date. You must feel totally overwhelmed by his performance :-). If not, better to be thought a fool than open your mouth & prove it. But alas, you're way past the point where anyone believes anything you have to say, a bit like TW. That's your problem. No Arnie, it's yours. Most of the people here won't talk to you, and more the fool me for even bothering. I let you out of the plonk bin in error, so back you go. **Be specific and I will do my best to answer. Nice come back, Trevor! Only to a like-minded knowall like you Arnie. The rest of us can see through his BS, even if you can't. I'm only addressing the technical issue of the need for careful selection of devices in a zero loop NFB amp. That was merely a red herring on TW's part to try & draw the heat from the pasting he was getting for his continued defence of the indefensible. Every fool knows that there is SOME advantage in matching devices in a zero loop NFB amp, but TW is claiming that it's such a difficult task that only PS can do it! But ruff, there are two lots of global NFB loops in ME amps. Trevor has been lying to us about it for years. There ain't nothing wrong with GNFB and the matching of devices merely gilds the lilly. What's more, he hasn't even managed to convince anyone (apart from yourself) that ME amps HAVE zero global NFB. I would say that they must have some global NFB, but because there are no schematics or notes of any kind regarding their construction available to techs, no-one knows for sure. Not even TW, I suspect. See my other post about the ME75 schematic I do have here. Patrick Turner. In closing, I have a nice linear amp on my bench at the moment. Its output is 3 kW. If you're passing, you might like to poke a screwdriver into it. Good night Arnie. ruff |
#174
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
Phil Allison wrote: "Arny Krueger" What I do read is someone pretty well skewering Trevor over device matching procedures. ** Merely skewering ???? Thought I had TW well and truly barbequed and ready for public dining. Beware of severe indigestion - but. I beat you getting him on the BBQ. He didn't wanna talk about his testing methods. Now I have almost vaporized the body with overcooking when i showed that an ME75 has two loops of global NFB, which of course he queerly doesn't like, but i assure you GNFB isn't something to ever be ashamed of if you really wanna hear good music through transistors. Patrick Turner. ..... Phil |
#175
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise
Trevor Wilson wrote: "Phil Allison" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" **Correct. Just to recap: I don't attempt to match transistors for ME repairs. I buy them from Peter. I merely listed the above tests to show that transistors vary wildly in Hfe. ** You have shown no such thing with a meaningless test with that unsuitable " Peak " meter - which is clearly intended for small signal devices. The Hfe of high power BJTs typically falls off sharply below 100mA Ic. The very same group of MJ15003s will likely test very close in Hfe at an Ic of 250mA or more. **Indeed. I made that very point earlier. For matching output devices in an output stage, it is important to match at suitably high currents. I am still waiting to find out if that is how Mouser match their devices. Here are some more results form my own stock. The first column are some devices (MJ15004) tested at 1 Amp (by Peter Stein). The second column at around 4ma (the Peak tester): 81 79 89 85 80 77 74 71 81 77 85 81 From the above, we can see that you are correct. The gain is lower at lower currents. Importantly, however, the gain difference appears to be similar across all the devices. IOW: Although not an accurate indicator of Hfe at high currents, a low current measurement may provide a rough approximation. Which is what I was attempting to demonstrate. Trevor Wilson The vast amount of loop NFB used in ME amps reduces the mismatch caused distortions to negligible levels. There are usually large differences in character between NPN and PNP devices. Its all unimportant if plenty of loop FB is applied correctly. The matching issue is one of many issues, most of which you don't seem to be aware of. People will do very well to read Douglas Self and Ben Duncan on SS amplifier operation, and leave our Trevor to mumble to himself. If Trevor ever designed and built an amp himself, he'd force himself to realise what is really important, and there would be less bull**** sprayed around the net all night. Patrick Turner. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
#176
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
Trevor Wilson wrote: "keithr" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... "keithr" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... Good transistor amps function perfectly well with wider tolerances than you say because of the abundance of local and other NFB. **"Good" is your term. not mine. I happen to feel that amplifiers which use lots of Golbal NFB are not "good". They are average. Trevor Wilson Speaking as one who has never seen, heard, or even smelled an ME amp perhaps you can clear something up for me. As I understand it the ME is made up of several modules in the signal path. Each of these modules has it's own feedback loop. **Not quite. The amplifier is not all that complex. It is pretty standard, full complementary symmetry thoughout, dual differential inputs, with the obligatory active current sources. The Voltage amplifier stage uses around 15dB of Global NFB to stabilise Voltage gain to the desired level. The Voltage amp feeds the current amplifier, which uses local feedback only (no loop, from output back to input). The output devices are coupled to the load via the collectors, rather than the more usual emitter follower configuration. So, no, each module does not have it's own feedback loop. Only the Voltage amp has a feedback loop. Assuming that the module and it's feedback path are correctly designed and thus pass an undistorted signal to the next downstream module, why does this require such tight tolerancing in the output stage? **Because there is no loop feedback around the output stage. Additionally, the feedback that does operate, is lightly applied. I do assume that the ouput stage module has it's own feedback loop and is being fed an undistorted signal. **The output stage uses no feedback loop. All feedback is local only. IOW: Degenerative feedback only. Maybe a little feedback around the output stage would eliminate the need for such close matching without changing the sound, but I suppose that in audio, everybody has to have their own gimmick to differentiate their product. **There's the rub. Peter Stein did build some sample amps which used some Global NFB. Distortion was reduced (from what was already an inaudible level) and it would have reduced the dependence on matched devices. HOWEVER, blind testing showed that most listeners preferred the zero Global NFB approach. I was one of those listeners. I received two, otherwise identical, amplifiers. I was asked to judge which I preferred over a period of several weeks. I was not told what differences there were, nor what to expect. Whilst the differences were not earth-shattering, they were obvious. You are lying again trevvy boyo! The ME75 power amp schematic I found I have does have two global NFB loops. The power amp is split into input diff amps and VAS stage, with GNFB, and then that drives the Sziclai based output stage, with its separate GNFB loop. Just how Peter Stein ever managed to have one GNFB around both amp sections is a mystery because curing HF instability would have been a problem. There are maybe hundreds of ways to configure an SS power amp. Read Ben Duncan's 1996 book on SS amps and their historical development. Read books Trevor, your addled brain won't fall out of your head. I explained all the details re ME75 last night as fully as i could. Your understanding of ME amps is totally appalling. There is absolutely zero rational for anything you have said. Patrick Turner. Trevor Wilson |
#177
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking on water! How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may realise whom you are actually abusing? Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! |
#178
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... "roughplanet" wrote in message u "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message "Patrick Turner" wrote in message ... I never read what Trevor says about ME amps or the way transistors are matched because its all empty sales talk and utter BS. Is device matching more important in a power amp that lacks loop feedback? Unequivocally yes! **Read the above very carefully. THIS is exactly what I am talking about. Every tech on the planet claims to know more about ME amplifiers than Peter Stein does. They WILL NOT fit critically matched devices, even when specifically instructed to do so. They will always take the easy (cheap) way out. As a consequence, the performance and reliability of the product will suffer. I know. I've seen the messes that have been created by second rate techs, who think they know it all. Sounds like a believable story. To someone as thick as two short planks I'm sure it does. Long on childish name-calling, short on relevant facts. Says the person who inferred that TT was a paedophile to score a point. Pot, kettle black Arnie. What??? You're really reaching for those childish insults, TT. What geological era are you reaching back into? Were there even dinosaurs on the earth back then? ;-) No Arnie, you can't do a TW and try to wriggle out of what you said by moving the goal posts. What you said was quite recent, as well you know, you dirtbag. Where did you get your EE from, a cereal box? ;-) No answer from TT, so we can presume that his technical knowledge of electronics and audio is nil. Presume anything you like. You'll be wrong on all of your presumptions. All the schematics in the world will not help, as long as techs think they know more than Peter does about his own product. Well, they think that he is being hypercautious. We've seen people like this on this thread. I know, from my own experience, that some high Global NFB products benefit from the use of matched devices. In a product with no Global NFB, the importance of matching becomes far more crucial. Agreed. Gawd TW, You have dug yourself a hole so deep that you will never get out of it now, no matter what. More mouth than brains! Ahh.....the emergence of the Krooborg from his hole in the ground. Church finish early this evening Arnie? No comment Arnie? Say something worth commenting, and I will comment on it. Hmmm......a bit too close to the truth, eh? Why not go away & have a good think about the logic, or rather, the lack of it in what you have said, and then come back & TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH & ONLY THE TRUTH to the other members of this group. If irony killed! You'd be dead, dead, dead. More childish name-calling, still no relevant technical comments. And what relevant technical comments are called for to describe TW's feeble attempt to 'baffle with BS'? I see no such attempt. I do see a tired little Terry with zero credentials trying to dazzle us with his lame insults. Then you are obviously dreaming Arnie. He's obviously got you fooled, so your grasp of technical facts can't be too crash hot. There's no fooling except by you, Terry. Hah hah hah.............you're the fool here Arnie. You will gain at least some respect; more than if you just keep banging away at the same old gong, which is now badly dented & in need of replacing. I don't think that Trevor is infallible and have crossed swords with him many times. But, when Trevor is right like this, Trevor deserves respect, not the derision of fools. And who are you that your opinion, and that's all you have to offer, is correct? Just a graduate engineer with 40 years of relevant experience. Graduate from where exactly Arnie, Oakland University - please see their web site: http://www.oakland.edu/ and what type of engineering? http://www2.oakland.edu/secs/ECEdept/ I ask only out of curiosity, given that the credibility of US university qualifications varies from high to appalling. Which end do yours come from? Someplace in the top quarter. Trevor ISN'T right. On the technical point, he is. No he's not. Prove it. He hasn't provided one single shred of hard evidence to substantiate his claims regarding ME amplifiers. What Trevor claims about the effects of device matching in amps with zero loop feedback is consistent with general electrical engineering knowlege. I should add that trying to build a high quality amplifier while intentionally avoiding loop feedback is generally considered to be very unwise - there has to be some very powerful explanation for trying to do such a weird thing, and no such explantion is known to exist for audio power amps being used in a common residential setting. Why? Because there isn't any available, or at least, none that either he or PS are prepared to make public. What Trevor claims about superior sonics due to zero loop feedback is total BS, and it is exceptionally easy to show that sonically perfect amplification is fairly easy to provide by common, relatively inexpensive means. So you do agree with me. Thank you. But why have you denied it so vehemently? Anybody who brags about ever owning a power amp with zero loop feedback is basically advertising that they have paid had cash to fail a publicly-administered intelligence test. Administered by whom, and please, don't insult my intelligence by saying yourself. As the saying goes, self praise is no recommendation. BTW Terry, didn't you say that you once owned a ME power amp? ;-) No I didn't. He's just a BS artiste trying to sell something that died several years ago but won't lie down. That's a different issue. That's THE issue here Arnie. Then address it with a technically-sound argument. The device-matching argument goes Trevor's way, the superior sonics issue goes against him. If you'd bothered to follow this thread from its inception, you'd see that it was about tube amplification, something TW knows very little about. I don't think that a person doing audio in the 21st century need know much about tubed amplification, unless perhaps they work in an electronics museum. More childish insults. Pot, kettle black yet again Arnie. The very mention of SET amplifiers causes a rush of blood so forceful that he can't control his negative reactions & immediately begins to rubbish the piece of equipment under discussion, never mind the fact that he's never even heard it. Well, I've heard dozens of SET amplifiers. On one occasion where my ears had been fatigued by listening to a bunch of SETs, I found the sound from a credibly-designed PP tubed amp (by Manley) to be a real breath of fresh air. Yet even more childish insults. Can't you offer anything approaching an intelligent argument? Of course SS rules. Only in your tiny mind. A bit like yourself. I've built over a dozen tubed power amps, some scratch designs, some kits. I still own tubed audio gear and occasionally use it. I know why tube technology is best forgotten, out in the real world. You know very little about a whole lot, due to the 'knowall syndrome' that seems to afflict many technophobes. Like 'all SS amps sound the same' or 'all CD players sound the same'....hell the list just goes on & on. Perhaps that's why you have jumped to his defence, but only when I gave him some stick. I have to admit that I find it amusing to watch you wet your pants in public Terry. I'm close enough to even catch a whiff of the urine. I'll leave the messy clean-up to other. One word for you Terry: Depends. ;-) I think you'll agree shortly that the urine you're smelling is your own Arnie. Something about ****ing into the wind :-). You might even think I'm an easy mark Arnie, but I built my first amplifier in 1958, using KT88's. Most of us who were using tubes for audio in 1958 learned our lesson. You seem to be hard to teach, Terry. I guess I thus need to remind you about the benefits of Depends. http://www.depend.com/products/products_all.asp I still have it. A bit rough, sure, but I was only 14 years old. I think they refer to that as an 'early adopter'. In 2008, we refer to continued obsession with tubes as being a "poor learner". 'We'? The Royal Plural Arnie, or just a pompous gesture meant to infer that you have more friends than the face in the mirror? How can you comment on something you know absolutely nothing about? You've shown me how? ;-) Now who's using childish replies? Once again, pot, kettle, balck. What's a balck, Terry? ;-) Wait for it Arnie. Have you ever even seen an ME amp, much less owned one? I don't need to own a zero loop FB SS amp to know something of their care and feeding. Then you haven't been reading anything TW has said. His claim is that ME amplifiers require such careful maintenance that only he &/or PS can carry it out! I didn't read that. You haven't read anything Arnie; that's your problem, but we'll get to that shortly. Perhaps that was because I read with my eyes, not with my dreams. What a stupid, childish statement. Even TW wouldn't make such a silly remark. What I do read is someone pretty well skewering Trevor over device matching procedures. You're all BS and blather Arnie, just like your mate TW. As I said, I've crossed swords with Trevor over the larger issue many times. I'm only addressing the narrow issue of device matching. I owned one of these amps Arnie, as well as the then matching preamp, and believe me they were nothing special. That's a different issue. Again, it's not. See above. As ADD as you seem to be Terry, I'm wasting my breath when I ask you to try to remain focussed. But TW will no doubt tell you that I owned 'an early model' or some such BS & so my opinion doesn't matter. Given your inability to understand audio technology, your opinion is geneally wrong. Geneally Arnie? What's that mean? See; anyone can make a typo, even you! Examples? The current discussion. One or two typos or late night mistakes & you turn them into a sweeping generalisation, a bit like PA was so fond of doing. What did he call them.....ahh yes, 'educated guesses'. I'm not defending PA, except of course when he's right, which he often is. At least you've got that right. PA is almost invariably right about technical matters, and has, of late, been remarkably tolerant of the BS that TW & yourself have been flinging around this newsgroup. What do you call them Arnie? We like to call them LIES! Terry, to lie you have to know the truth, and frankly that excuses you from many of your more obvious public follies. And yet another sad, childish insult; the sort you accuse other people of making. Trevor Wilson have done very nicely out of ME 'upgrades' & repairs, as without schematics or any other information on which to rely, other technicians have one hand tied behind their back. That's a different issue. No it's not. See above. Do try to get focussed, Terry. Of course if you haven't learned it by the time you are in your 60s, you probably never will. So put up or shut up Arnie. If you know something we don't, then by all means tell us. Been there, done that. You spit on it. You've never been anywhere, much less do anything. Prove it. Even that web site of yours that you're so proud of referring to at the drop of a hat was last edited in 2001. Please be specific, there are two sites, and pages on both prove you wrong. I just want to know which mistake you are making. ;-) Then what does this say Arnie? Send questions or comments on the PC AV Tech Soundcard Test web pages to Arny Krueger. (c) Copyright 1998, Arnold B. Krueger. All rights reserved. Please let The Webmaster know of any problems you encounter on this website. (c) Copyright 1998, 1999 Arnold B. Krueger. All rights reserved. HTML Design by David Carlstrom and Arny Krueger This Page Last Revised 05/03/2000 (abk) No wonder you're siding with TW. His ME amps are 30 years out of date. You must feel totally overwhelmed by his performance :-). Terry, on the larger issue of the technical advisability of ME amps, all I can say is that I'm proud to have never been so stupid as to actually pay hard cash to buy one. Too bad you can't say the same! LOL! If not, better to be thought a fool than open your mouth & prove it. But alas, you're way past the point where anyone believes anything you have to say, a bit like TW. That's your problem. No Arnie, it's yours. Most of the people here won't talk to you, and more the fool me for even bothering. Most of the people here know that I'm often right and will call them up when they aren't. Since they are often in error, I can understand why they don't want to risk trying to correct me. I let you out of the plonk bin in error, so back you go. That allows me to blindside you at will, Terry. Thanks! And thank you Arnie for proving to everybody on this newsgroup that you really are a total dickhead who can't even tell who he's talking to. It was me, ruff, that you were arguing with, not TT, you bird brain. And you have the audacity to accuse 'us' of not being focused or lying. Sheeesh! Go back to bed, you obviously need more sleep, or maybe it's the early signs of dementia. Whatever, you've truly made a complete fool of yourself this time Arnie, and I for one won't ever let you forget it. ruff |
#179
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"TT" wrote in message
... "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking on water! How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may realise whom you are actually abusing? Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). ruff |
#180
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
when i showed that an ME75 has two loops of global NFB, which of course he queerly doesn't like, Since you have a schematic, could you post it for a day so that I could get a copy? but i assure you GNFB isn't something to ever be ashamed of if you really wanna hear good music through transistors. From your description, Trvor's claim of zero GNFB is hanging by a tattered thread. |
#181
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
Arny Krueger wrote: "Patrick Turner" wrote in message when i showed that an ME75 has two loops of global NFB, which of course he queerly doesn't like, Since you have a schematic, could you post it for a day so that I could get a copy? but i assure you GNFB isn't something to ever be ashamed of if you really wanna hear good music through transistors. From your description, Trvor's claim of zero GNFB is hanging by a tattered thread. Trevor desperately and irrationally tries to make out that because there is no global NFB, then miraculuosly, the ME amps sound better than all others. He says there is only local and "de-generative" feedback, which means the FB acts like an unbypassed cathode R in a tube amp stage, which is local current FB, or like having NFB from an OPT tertiary to the cathodes of output tubes, like Quad-II amps. Its also local NFB, because its around only ONE DEVICE, OK. Complementary Sziclai pairs are used in the ME output stage and depend heavily on their NFB for their linearity, and depend on matching by a tiny amount. I did a quick estimate of the open loop voltage gain of the ME Sziclai pairs and got about 300. This is reduced by the GNFB to just under 1, so there is 50dB NFB action going on. So if the OLG of the BJTs was a typical 10% without any FB at all, it is reduced to 0.03% by the NFB, ( and hardly at all because of the matching ). Its not unusual for the diff input pairs and VAS stage to have OLG = 20,000. In my own 300W amps, that's what it is, and OLG Dn = about 5%, including a large number of artifacts because of inherent differences between PNP and NPN devices, even when working in true PP class A. But mainly THD is 2H and 3H, and very much similar to a pair of pentodes set up for high gain in PP. Matching can be as good as you could get in the VAS stage and there will still be high THD without NFB. Its because there is so much gain and over the whole wave cycle that the GNFB around such a stage is very effective in reducing THD and other horribles. The applied NFB reduces the OLG of 20,000 to CLG of 20, so the applied NFB is 60dB. So the THD of the input driver can be reduced typically from say 5% to 0.005% quite easily at 1dB below clipping. In my amp, the rails for the input / driver are higher than those used for the output, so the driver does not sustain anywhere near the high THD when output stage clipping approaches. I have no idea how closely ME transistors are matched but because Trevor Wilson lies and lies and lies EVERY time he opens his mouth to the Net regarding anything technical, every one should assume the whole claimed business of Peter Stein spending hours and hours nit picking over slight Hfe differences is all a load of bull****. I have listened to music recently through a 9 year old ME850. It was good for an SS amp. There are plenty of them around. There are plenty of not so hot ones, mainly the budget 40 watters by Cambridge, Creek and others. In an AB test between a guy with ME550 and a ValveMark 8 watt SET amp with a lone 300B, the Valvemark seemed to have more bass presence and top end detail. OK, the SET couldn't go very loud, but my customer at that time didn't need loudness. He's not deaf, and 8 watts was plenty. Sitting beside him and close to the VAF I-66 speakers, I could hear the validity that an SET amp TRULY AND REALLY WITHOUT GLOBAL NEGATIVE FB could sound very well indeed. He waited a year trying to get a good price for his ME gear and bought something with 300B from a guy in the US. A typical complementary pair NPN and PNP SS output stage operating in near class B is how most SS amps are set up. The Hfe of NPN and PNP at all currents can vary very widely, and so a darlington pair or triple is used ( Crown ) to raise the output base input resistance so that the high collector output resistance of the driver stage isn't shunted. In poor amps, this buffering isn't done, and because the Hfe is so different, the error signal from the VAS becomes distorted and I've seen 40% THD. So when you should have 0.003% THD at just under clip, you get only 0.05%. The only time the Hfe evens out to being constant right across the whole wave cycles and gives a constant Rin for the preceeding stage to drive is when the output stage runs in class A, which almost nobody ever does, or when there is sufficient buffering, see the schematic at http://www.turneraudio.com.au/solidstateamps2bjts.html The ME input and VAS driver stage would have a low Rout due to the global NFB around it and so the input R variations in the wave cycles of the output stage would be largely overcome, but nobody would ever know after reading the total ****ing BS that Trevor Wilson types each day. He simply is incapable and un-willing to analyse and describe accurately the detailed workings of ME amplifiers which are his favourite and on which he is supposed to be the local Sydney repair expert. Some expert. A Drip turned off, more like it. The trouble is that for some the Internet is like a soapbox, and as soon as someone stands on the soapbox, and gives a speach to those around them in the park on a fine sunday, their sense of self importance turns all that they say to utter ****ing trash. But I know my **** stinks at all times, and that I don't know everything. Trevor has yet to make these simple realizations. Patrick Turner. |
#182
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"roughplanet" wrote in message u... : "TT" wrote in message : ... : : "Arny Krueger" wrote in message : ... : : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! For the : record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking on water! : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest what : about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may realise : whom you are actually abusing? : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). : : ruff : Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an argument looking for a venue! Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) |
#183
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"TT" wrote in message
... "roughplanet" wrote in message u... "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! : For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking : on water! : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest : what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may : realise whom you are actually abusing? : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an argument looking for a venue! Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so anyone will do. But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of himself. Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt it. All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the head. What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of the congregation clap furiously:-). ruff |
#184
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"roughplanet" wrote in message u... : "TT" wrote in message : ... : : "roughplanet" wrote in : message u... : : "Arny Krueger" wrote in message : ... : : : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! : : For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking : : on water! : : : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest : : what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may : : realise whom you are actually abusing? : : : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : : : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). : : Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. : : See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I : haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an : argument looking for a venue! : : Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) : : It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so : anyone will do. : : But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for : a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of : himself. : Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt : it. : : All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an : argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. : Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his : kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the : head. : : What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers : can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually : turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of : the congregation clap furiously:-). : : ruff : And I thought you didn't know him very well ;-) When I get home tonight I just may copy the post across to RAO so the rest of his "mates" can see what an idiot he is :-)) Cheers Terry |
#185
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"TT" wrote in message . au... "roughplanet" wrote in message u... : "TT" wrote in message : ... : : "roughplanet" wrote in : message u... : : "Arny Krueger" wrote in message : ... : : : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! : : For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking : : on water! : : : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest : : what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may : : realise whom you are actually abusing? : : : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : : : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). : : Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. : : See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I : haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an : argument looking for a venue! : : Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) : : It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so : anyone will do. : : But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for : a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of : himself. : Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt : it. : : All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an : argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. : Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his : kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the : head. : : What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers : can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually : turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of : the congregation clap furiously:-). : : ruff : And I thought you didn't know him very well ;-) When I get home tonight I just may copy the post across to RAO so the rest of his "mates" can see what an idiot he is :-)) **You could post the whole thread. Pretty much everyone involved can hang their head in shame. I doubt anyone can remotely claim the high ground. I found Patrick's unprovoked attack on Peter Wieck was particularly shameful and quite offensive. Trevor Wilson |
#186
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
Trevor Wilson wrote:
"TT" wrote in message . au... "roughplanet" wrote in message u... : "TT" wrote in message : ... : : "roughplanet" wrote in : message u... : : "Arny Krueger" wrote in message : ... : : : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! : : For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking : : on water! : : : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest : : what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may : : realise whom you are actually abusing? : : : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : : : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). : : Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. : : See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I : haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an : argument looking for a venue! : : Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) : : It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so : anyone will do. : : But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for : a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of : himself. : Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt : it. : : All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an : argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. : Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his : kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the : head. : : What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers : can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually : turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of : the congregation clap furiously:-). : : ruff : And I thought you didn't know him very well ;-) When I get home tonight I just may copy the post across to RAO so the rest of his "mates" can see what an idiot he is :-)) **You could post the whole thread. Pretty much everyone involved can hang their head in shame. I doubt anyone can remotely claim the high ground. I found Patrick's unprovoked attack on Peter Wieck was particularly shameful and quite offensive. Trevor Wilson Not even a good red herring twevy , you should stop posting for a while until your residuals dissolve . |
#187
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
atec77 wrote: Trevor Wilson wrote: "TT" wrote in message . au... "roughplanet" wrote in message u... : "TT" wrote in message : ... : : "roughplanet" wrote in : message u... : : "Arny Krueger" wrote in message : ... : : : Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! : : For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! : : : : I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking : : on water! : : : : How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest : : what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may : : realise whom you are actually abusing? : : : : Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! : : : Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). : : Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. : : See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I : haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an : argument looking for a venue! : : Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) : : It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so : anyone will do. : : But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for : a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of : himself. : Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt : it. : : All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an : argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. : Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his : kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the : head. : : What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers : can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually : turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of : the congregation clap furiously:-). : : ruff : And I thought you didn't know him very well ;-) When I get home tonight I just may copy the post across to RAO so the rest of his "mates" can see what an idiot he is :-)) **You could post the whole thread. Pretty much everyone involved can hang their head in shame. I doubt anyone can remotely claim the high ground. I found Patrick's unprovoked attack on Peter Wieck was particularly shameful and quite offensive. Trevor Wilson Peter would have returned fire if he thought I'd been offensive to him. In case Trevor hasn't noticed, I'm about the most tolerant and liberal minded of posters here, and one whose inputs on technical issues often more than everyone else put together. But I don't tolerate fools easily when they are stubbornly in fool mode. So, I am quite serene and peaceful knowing Trevor is offended and challenged when he operates in bull****ting mode. He asks for it and I give it. Not even a good red herring twevy , you should stop posting for a while until your residuals dissolve . Yeah, maybe he'd have time to build a website and display how much he knows about ME amps, which would involve having ME schematics on display. Pigs will learn the secrets of porcine flight before then I fear. But without a publically accessible set of schematics for ME amps, people should assume EVERYTHING TREVOR WILSON SAYS ABOUT ME AMPS TO BE A PILE OF LIES AND BULL****. Glad I **SHOUTED** !!! Patrick Turner. |
#188
Posted to aus.hi-fi,rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Tube/Valve Amp Noise (attention Alan and Iain)
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
... atec77 wrote: Trevor Wilson wrote: "TT" wrote in message . au... "roughplanet" wrote in message u... "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Hey dumb arse, you were talking to roughplanet and abusing me! For the record I haven't been anywhere near you in this thread! I would call for an apology but I would have more chance walking on water! How about the next time you step into a NG looking for an abuse-fest what about you try and be a at least a little bit sober then you may realise whom you are actually abusing? Note: this is TT and *NOT* Ruff! Spoil sport!!! See my post below :-). Very good Ruff :-)) You were reeling him in very nicely. See how I can get abused by this terminal idiot and I haven't been near him for a month! All this arsehole is an argument looking for a venue! Cheers Terry (or am I Ruff today, or Alan or TW........????) It doesn't matter who you are, the fool is just spoiling for an argument, so anyone will do. But watch his behavior now. If he's true to form, he'll drop out of site for a month until (he hopes) people have forgotten what a total idiot he made of himself. Alternatively, this post might just stir him into action again, but I doubt it. All these control freaks behave in the same manner; they can never lose an argument, never be wrong & never make a mistake. Arnie has just failed on all three counts, so he's probably sitting in his kennel licking his balls & hoping someone will come along & pat him on the head. What a sad, self-opiniated bugger he is. I bet even his fellow churchgoers can't stand the sight of him, and look forward to the day when he actually turns the other cheek so someone can king hit the prick whilst the rest of the congregation clap furiously:-). And I thought you didn't know him very well ;-) When I get home tonight I just may copy the post across to RAO so the rest of his "mates" can see what an idiot he is :-)) **You could post the whole thread. Pretty much everyone involved can hang their head in shame. I doubt anyone can remotely claim the high ground. I found Patrick's unprovoked attack on Peter Wieck was particularly shameful and quite offensive. Huh? I must have missed that , or it was so innocuous it wasn't worth mentioning. Drawing the heat again TW? Peter would have returned fire if he thought I'd been offensive to him. In case Trevor hasn't noticed, I'm about the most tolerant and liberal minded of posters here, and one whose inputs on technical issues often more than everyone else put together. But I don't tolerate fools easily when they are stubbornly in fool mode. So, I am quite serene and peaceful knowing Trevor is offended and challenged when he operates in bull****ting mode. He asks for it and I give it. Not even a good red herring twevy , you should stop posting for a while until your residuals dissolve . Yeah, maybe he'd have time to build a website and display how much he knows about ME amps, which would involve having ME schematics on display. Pigs will learn the secrets of porcine flight before then I fear. But without a publically accessible set of schematics for ME amps, people should assume EVERYTHING TREVOR WILSON SAYS ABOUT ME AMPS TO BE A PILE OF LIES AND BULL****. Glad I **SHOUTED** !!! ME TOO (pun intended) :-). ruff |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Tube/valve amp kit question | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Tube (valve) bases? | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Calibrating an AVO tube/valve tester | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Valve Art KT100?? Can I use this tube? | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Valve/Tube Tester on U.K. Ebay | Vacuum Tubes |