Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#641
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. Yes, but I'm sure we could all characterize the general differences between cars with conventional steam engines (metaphor for vinylism and tubism) and high performance modern engines (metaphor for good solid state and digital). |
#642
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#643
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#644
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#645
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#646
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. Yes, but I'm sure we could all characterize the general differences between cars with conventional steam engines (metaphor for vinylism and tubism) and high performance modern engines (metaphor for good solid state and digital). That is consisitent with your known and proven minimal abilities of discernment. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#647
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. Yes, but I'm sure we could all characterize the general differences between cars with conventional steam engines (metaphor for vinylism and tubism) and high performance modern engines (metaphor for good solid state and digital). That is consisitent with your known and proven minimal abilities of discernment. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#648
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. Yes, but I'm sure we could all characterize the general differences between cars with conventional steam engines (metaphor for vinylism and tubism) and high performance modern engines (metaphor for good solid state and digital). That is consisitent with your known and proven minimal abilities of discernment. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#649
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. Yes, but I'm sure we could all characterize the general differences between cars with conventional steam engines (metaphor for vinylism and tubism) and high performance modern engines (metaphor for good solid state and digital). That is consisitent with your known and proven minimal abilities of discernment. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#650
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Whilst you croon "If the River was whiskey and I was a divin' duck, I'd dive to the bottom and never get up." (Sleepy John Estes) ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#651
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Whilst you croon "If the River was whiskey and I was a divin' duck, I'd dive to the bottom and never get up." (Sleepy John Estes) ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#652
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Whilst you croon "If the River was whiskey and I was a divin' duck, I'd dive to the bottom and never get up." (Sleepy John Estes) ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#653
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:18:18 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:16:00 -0500, "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote: "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message This argument is about the ridiculous concept btought forth, that tube guitar amps and tube audio amps are, and sound, the same. That would be a straw man that you created, Yustabe. no, way back when, it was offered that they were the same. Nope, it was offered that the distortion *mechanisms* are the same. They are. Just like various cars have the same propulsion 'mechanisms', yet they are different from each other, have different performances, and have different 'feels'. As ever, you lose the argument and start to duck and dive............. -- Whilst you croon "If the River was whiskey and I was a divin' duck, I'd dive to the bottom and never get up." (Sleepy John Estes) ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#654
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "=(8888)=" wrote in message ... "Sander deWaal" emitted : I still have a Sony amp from 1975, but they used VFETS, not MOSFET's. If you overlook the device construction difference, then I think Sony were the first to use high power FET's in a power amp. Sony invented the VFET, the Hitachi power MosFET's came later. IIRC, Yamaha had an amp around that time (B1 or B2?) with 2SK77 MOSFETS. A giant beast, and those transistors looked like 2N3055s on steroids (twice the size of a TO-3) . Cool! What is the general consensus for the sound of MOSFET amps? I had a Session guitar amp that employed MOSFETs, was very clean but clinical sounding vs tube amps. Like home hi fi amps guitar amps made with tubes generate Euphonic distortion, that is distortion that pleases the ear, or at least the person playing a guitar through one. Tube amps are preferred by many if not most guitar players because they distort in a way that allows them another way to create. MOSFET's don't distort audibly unless over driven (or badly designed or broken). For other instruments MOSFET would be the more likely choice. Generally, tube guitar amp distortion is different from that of an audio tube amp. It is purposefully accentuated. Which is the point I was making. They do things with distortion that SS amps don't and therefore are useful in helping the guitarist express himself. Most guitar palyers would find an audio tube amp, outfitted with appropriate inputs, useless. So do most audiophiles, but that's not the point I was making. Tubes distort. The distortion of tube amp that a guitar player might use is useful for creating music. The distortion an tube used in a home hi-fi creates, is just distortion. That some persons like that distortion is their choice. It is not the same distortion, so please don't compare them. Of course it is. Tubes are tubes and they have specific characteristics, one of them is how they clip. first of all, that is not linear, and second of all, there is more to the amp and its circuitry than just the tubes. After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! It just shows how naive and simplistic you are. If one were to play a cd throught an audio tube amp and a guitar tube amp, iven the same speakers, it would sound quite different. I never said they wouldn't. I said they create the same kind of distortion. Why is that hard to grasp? ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#655
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "=(8888)=" wrote in message ... "Sander deWaal" emitted : I still have a Sony amp from 1975, but they used VFETS, not MOSFET's. If you overlook the device construction difference, then I think Sony were the first to use high power FET's in a power amp. Sony invented the VFET, the Hitachi power MosFET's came later. IIRC, Yamaha had an amp around that time (B1 or B2?) with 2SK77 MOSFETS. A giant beast, and those transistors looked like 2N3055s on steroids (twice the size of a TO-3) . Cool! What is the general consensus for the sound of MOSFET amps? I had a Session guitar amp that employed MOSFETs, was very clean but clinical sounding vs tube amps. Like home hi fi amps guitar amps made with tubes generate Euphonic distortion, that is distortion that pleases the ear, or at least the person playing a guitar through one. Tube amps are preferred by many if not most guitar players because they distort in a way that allows them another way to create. MOSFET's don't distort audibly unless over driven (or badly designed or broken). For other instruments MOSFET would be the more likely choice. Generally, tube guitar amp distortion is different from that of an audio tube amp. It is purposefully accentuated. Which is the point I was making. They do things with distortion that SS amps don't and therefore are useful in helping the guitarist express himself. Most guitar palyers would find an audio tube amp, outfitted with appropriate inputs, useless. So do most audiophiles, but that's not the point I was making. Tubes distort. The distortion of tube amp that a guitar player might use is useful for creating music. The distortion an tube used in a home hi-fi creates, is just distortion. That some persons like that distortion is their choice. It is not the same distortion, so please don't compare them. Of course it is. Tubes are tubes and they have specific characteristics, one of them is how they clip. first of all, that is not linear, and second of all, there is more to the amp and its circuitry than just the tubes. After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! It just shows how naive and simplistic you are. If one were to play a cd throught an audio tube amp and a guitar tube amp, iven the same speakers, it would sound quite different. I never said they wouldn't. I said they create the same kind of distortion. Why is that hard to grasp? ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#656
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "=(8888)=" wrote in message ... "Sander deWaal" emitted : I still have a Sony amp from 1975, but they used VFETS, not MOSFET's. If you overlook the device construction difference, then I think Sony were the first to use high power FET's in a power amp. Sony invented the VFET, the Hitachi power MosFET's came later. IIRC, Yamaha had an amp around that time (B1 or B2?) with 2SK77 MOSFETS. A giant beast, and those transistors looked like 2N3055s on steroids (twice the size of a TO-3) . Cool! What is the general consensus for the sound of MOSFET amps? I had a Session guitar amp that employed MOSFETs, was very clean but clinical sounding vs tube amps. Like home hi fi amps guitar amps made with tubes generate Euphonic distortion, that is distortion that pleases the ear, or at least the person playing a guitar through one. Tube amps are preferred by many if not most guitar players because they distort in a way that allows them another way to create. MOSFET's don't distort audibly unless over driven (or badly designed or broken). For other instruments MOSFET would be the more likely choice. Generally, tube guitar amp distortion is different from that of an audio tube amp. It is purposefully accentuated. Which is the point I was making. They do things with distortion that SS amps don't and therefore are useful in helping the guitarist express himself. Most guitar palyers would find an audio tube amp, outfitted with appropriate inputs, useless. So do most audiophiles, but that's not the point I was making. Tubes distort. The distortion of tube amp that a guitar player might use is useful for creating music. The distortion an tube used in a home hi-fi creates, is just distortion. That some persons like that distortion is their choice. It is not the same distortion, so please don't compare them. Of course it is. Tubes are tubes and they have specific characteristics, one of them is how they clip. first of all, that is not linear, and second of all, there is more to the amp and its circuitry than just the tubes. After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! It just shows how naive and simplistic you are. If one were to play a cd throught an audio tube amp and a guitar tube amp, iven the same speakers, it would sound quite different. I never said they wouldn't. I said they create the same kind of distortion. Why is that hard to grasp? ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#657
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message ... "=(8888)=" wrote in message ... "Sander deWaal" emitted : I still have a Sony amp from 1975, but they used VFETS, not MOSFET's. If you overlook the device construction difference, then I think Sony were the first to use high power FET's in a power amp. Sony invented the VFET, the Hitachi power MosFET's came later. IIRC, Yamaha had an amp around that time (B1 or B2?) with 2SK77 MOSFETS. A giant beast, and those transistors looked like 2N3055s on steroids (twice the size of a TO-3) . Cool! What is the general consensus for the sound of MOSFET amps? I had a Session guitar amp that employed MOSFETs, was very clean but clinical sounding vs tube amps. Like home hi fi amps guitar amps made with tubes generate Euphonic distortion, that is distortion that pleases the ear, or at least the person playing a guitar through one. Tube amps are preferred by many if not most guitar players because they distort in a way that allows them another way to create. MOSFET's don't distort audibly unless over driven (or badly designed or broken). For other instruments MOSFET would be the more likely choice. Generally, tube guitar amp distortion is different from that of an audio tube amp. It is purposefully accentuated. Which is the point I was making. They do things with distortion that SS amps don't and therefore are useful in helping the guitarist express himself. Most guitar palyers would find an audio tube amp, outfitted with appropriate inputs, useless. So do most audiophiles, but that's not the point I was making. Tubes distort. The distortion of tube amp that a guitar player might use is useful for creating music. The distortion an tube used in a home hi-fi creates, is just distortion. That some persons like that distortion is their choice. It is not the same distortion, so please don't compare them. Of course it is. Tubes are tubes and they have specific characteristics, one of them is how they clip. first of all, that is not linear, and second of all, there is more to the amp and its circuitry than just the tubes. After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! It just shows how naive and simplistic you are. If one were to play a cd throught an audio tube amp and a guitar tube amp, iven the same speakers, it would sound quite different. I never said they wouldn't. I said they create the same kind of distortion. Why is that hard to grasp? ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#659
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"dave weil" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) |
#660
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"dave weil" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) |
#661
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
"dave weil" wrote in message ... On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) |
#662
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:06:39 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) Only took you 5 days to think that one up. Maybe the smart pills are working... |
#663
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:06:39 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) Only took you 5 days to think that one up. Maybe the smart pills are working... |
#664
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:06:39 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) Only took you 5 days to think that one up. Maybe the smart pills are working... |
#665
|
|||
|
|||
Hafler (the first MOSFET? I don't think so)
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:06:39 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote: "dave weil" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:00:53 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 08:55:21 -0600, dave weil wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:59:58 -0500, "Arny Krueger" wrote: "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message After all, the tubes don't exist in a vacuum!!! We've got to memorialize this post somewhere. It's an all-time classic. Yes, there's probably a tube or two still in outer space. Still as dumb as a rock, huh Vile? Actually, there *are* lots of thermionic valves (tubes to you) which live in vacuum chambers, and don't have envelopes of their own. I don't believe that I said "the *only* tubes in a vacuum are in outer space". Leave it to you to take a humorous comment as some sort of "factual comment". Did you not have your daily litre of scotch yet? I love talking to a person whose name equates the size of his member with the last finger on his hand. I thought you and Trotsky broke up. :-) Only took you 5 days to think that one up. Maybe the smart pills are working... |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Book Review: Home Theater For Everyone: A Practical Guide ; Harley, Holman | General | |||
Using DJ Amplifiers in Home Theater | Audio Opinions | |||
Home Theater "Junkyard Wars" | Audio Opinions | |||
Home theater recommandation please | General | |||
Home Theater Upgrade Path | High End Audio |