On 16 Dec 2005 19:37:58 -0800, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:


Arny Krueger wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Arny Krueger wrote:
the usual SET dogma of maximizing distortion.

Is this a troll Krueger or do you really believe your own dumb ****?

In theory SET dogma reduces a certain type of distortion,

Name that distortion. BTW, in case there's any confusion, I don't mean make
one up!

SET advocates believe all phase splitters are imperfect and so
eliminating them eliminates asymetric drive issues, also that push-pull
transformer cores are magnetized and unmagnetized on each cycle.
However, even if that's so the core magnetization is ten times worse,
making sufficient primary inductance impossible for good LF response if
HF response is not to be killed off.

It should be noted out of fairness in the case of a deliberately
restricted bandpass amplifier, perhaps one for a treble driver, single
ended can provide better results than at first it would appear. The
Audio Anthology provides the example of a treble SET for a horn driver
that provides 4 watts, and by limiting power protects the driver since
it will handle at least three times that in square wave power at 50%,
symmetrical duty cycle.

Of course, the above problems don't occur in a *solid state* SE amp
such as the Nelson Pass Zen or my own KISASS - but that's not a
recommendation for either in any absolute sense. You see, the fact
that SET lovers *believe* that there's something mysteriously 'wrong'
with phase splitters doesn't make it so.

1) It's certainly possible to make a push-pull amplifier with complete
symmetry, tubed or SS.

2) SET amps are *extremely* assymetric by nature, so that argument
kinda falls on its face at the first hurdle.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering