"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Incorrect and innappropriate application
of NFB can damage an amplifier's performance.

Now you're getting it, sonny.

**Then say so. Stop telling half-truths. There is NOTHING wrong with NFB, as
long as it is appropriately applied.

Next, try not to describe as a liar
anyone who doesn't instantly subscribe to your fanatical faith in Blow
Jobs from Transvestites (BJTs) and soon the rest of us might take you
seriously.

**I only tell it like it is.

Here are a few of your lies (some of which you have backtracked on):

"Negative feedback, shorthanded as NFB, is the instant response of the audio
engineering fraternity to all ills, real, perceived, non-existent."

"How does negative feedback work?
Negative feedback is simply a negative voltage fed back from the output to
the input amplifying device to offset part of the harmonic distortion which
is present as a positive voltage. It costs nothing except a loss of gain and
a few side effects such as phase shift and possible instability which are
well known in the mathematical literature and more or less easily guarded
against depending on the level of NFB."

"Negative feedback is what gives all those 'blameless' transistor and big
PP tube amps their chillingly unnatural sound."

"(I know, because a sub-board I designed for a supplier to the trade turns
up in so many very expensive amps with so many different big names neatly
silkscreened on it..."

" Suppose, for the sake of simplicity, a superbly designed ultrafidelista
amp with some second harmonic and zero odd harmonics before NFB."

"Let me say that again: after NFB, third and higher harmonics will make up a
greater part of the distortion than before."

"Low volume levels perforce accounts for 99 per cent of audiophile listening
because we all have families or neighbours, and we would like to keep our
ears."

"And they still use Negative Feedback?"

"The case against NFB is that for 99 per cent of listening the NFB cure is
worse than the disease."

"It follows from the argument above that ultrafidelista should choose an
intrinsically linear topology and device which does not require added
negative feedback to 'linearize' the output."

"The intrinsically linear device is the thermionic tube in either its triode
form or as a pentode hogtied to work as a triode, which can be a most
pleasing alternative both economically and sonically."

"In comparative ABX tests conducted over a number of years, I found that
professional musicians, certified golden ears, choose the triode-linked
Class A1 PP ZNFB EL34 whenever it is present in the test over all other
contenders including SE 300B and 'blameless' high-NFB silicon."

"But transistor amps won't work at all without NFB!"

"Engineering hangers-on of transistor attempts at high fidelity, where the
measure of success is vanishing THD rather than sonic hedonism, pretend to
be enthusiasts for NFB."

"They sneer that low level listening, which 99 per cent of us prefer"

"According to them we should all be forced to listen at the high volume
level which suits NFB amps, which they call 'realistic'."

"This is a contemptible circular argument, only too characteristic of a
fascist mentality in a part of the audiophile spectrum which wants to
prescribe their arid vision without regard for our enjoyment."

"Almost everyone listens at low level most of the time."

"Negative feedback is a bodge."


Would you care to amend these lies and state PRECISELY what you mean?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Trevor Wilson wrote:
Here are a few of your lies (some of which you have backtracked on):

And then this nutter Wilson lists:

-- a set of incontrovertible facts agreed by all parties, without
explaining how the facts straight out of the RDH can be a lie

-- a set of my opinions on matters of taste, without explaining how a
cultural taste can be a lie

-- and so on into astounding subdivisions of irrationality and
stupidity

Let's take just one example of what Wilson declares a lie. I wrote:

"Let me say that again: after NFB, third and higher harmonics will make up a
greater part of the distortion than before."

According to Wilson that is "a lie". Really? It is in fact a fact
(heh-heh) agreed between all informed parties that the NFB, while
reducing the *total* amount of distortion, by its very nature alters
the frequency distribution of the remaining distortion so that the odd
and higher harmonics make up a greater proportion of the recombinant
residual. That is several times spelt out in my original article which
causes Wilson to foam at the mouth. So tell us, Trevor-baby, how is my
statement lie?

I can't resist. Here's another statement (a rhetorical question,
actually) this blockhead Wilson singles out as "a lie":

"And they still use Negative Feedback?"

Uh, duh, Trevor-baby, are you now claiming that the entire audio world
has stopped using NFB? Amazing.

Below my signature I reprint Wilson's entire hysterical (and
hysterically funny) letter in full for connoisseurs of audio
fruitcakery.

What a blockhead.

Andre Jute

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Incorrect and innappropriate application
of NFB can damage an amplifier's performance.

Now you're getting it, sonny.

**Then say so. Stop telling half-truths. There is NOTHING wrong with NFB, as
long as it is appropriately applied.

Next, try not to describe as a liar
anyone who doesn't instantly subscribe to your fanatical faith in Blow
Jobs from Transvestites (BJTs) and soon the rest of us might take you
seriously.

**I only tell it like it is.

Here are a few of your lies (some of which you have backtracked on):

"Negative feedback, shorthanded as NFB, is the instant response of the audio
engineering fraternity to all ills, real, perceived, non-existent."

"How does negative feedback work?
Negative feedback is simply a negative voltage fed back from the output to
the input amplifying device to offset part of the harmonic distortion which
is present as a positive voltage. It costs nothing except a loss of gain and
a few side effects such as phase shift and possible instability which are
well known in the mathematical literature and more or less easily guarded
against depending on the level of NFB."

"Negative feedback is what gives all those 'blameless' transistor and big
PP tube amps their chillingly unnatural sound."

"(I know, because a sub-board I designed for a supplier to the trade turns
up in so many very expensive amps with so many different big names neatly
silkscreened on it..."

" Suppose, for the sake of simplicity, a superbly designed ultrafidelista
amp with some second harmonic and zero odd harmonics before NFB."

"Let me say that again: after NFB, third and higher harmonics will make up a
greater part of the distortion than before."

"Low volume levels perforce accounts for 99 per cent of audiophile listening
because we all have families or neighbours, and we would like to keep our
ears."

"And they still use Negative Feedback?"

"The case against NFB is that for 99 per cent of listening the NFB cure is
worse than the disease."

"It follows from the argument above that ultrafidelista should choose an
intrinsically linear topology and device which does not require added
negative feedback to 'linearize' the output."

"The intrinsically linear device is the thermionic tube in either its triode
form or as a pentode hogtied to work as a triode, which can be a most
pleasing alternative both economically and sonically."

"In comparative ABX tests conducted over a number of years, I found that
professional musicians, certified golden ears, choose the triode-linked
Class A1 PP ZNFB EL34 whenever it is present in the test over all other
contenders including SE 300B and 'blameless' high-NFB silicon."

"But transistor amps won't work at all without NFB!"

"Engineering hangers-on of transistor attempts at high fidelity, where the
measure of success is vanishing THD rather than sonic hedonism, pretend to
be enthusiasts for NFB."

"They sneer that low level listening, which 99 per cent of us prefer"

"According to them we should all be forced to listen at the high volume
level which suits NFB amps, which they call 'realistic'."

"This is a contemptible circular argument, only too characteristic of a
fascist mentality in a part of the audiophile spectrum which wants to
prescribe their arid vision without regard for our enjoyment."

"Almost everyone listens at low level most of the time."

"Negative feedback is a bodge."


Would you care to amend these lies and state PRECISELY what you mean?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Here are a few of your lies (some of which you have backtracked on):

And then this nutter Wilson lists:

**A whole big bunch of your lies. Nothing more.


-- a set of incontrovertible facts agreed by all parties, without
explaining how the facts straight out of the RDH can be a lie

**Cite your alleged "incontrovertible facts". I'll wait. I have copy of
RDH4. Just give me the page and chapter reference numbers.


-- a set of my opinions on matters of taste, without explaining how a
cultural taste can be a lie

**I have not argued with your opinions. Just your lies.


-- and so on into astounding subdivisions of irrationality and
stupidity

**Really? How about discussing your lies then? Let's see if you can manage
it, without profanity and insults. Just calmly and rationally discuss my
points, one by one. I bet you can't.


Let's take just one example of what Wilson declares a lie.

**No, let's discuss the entirety of my post.

I wrote:

"Let me say that again: after NFB, third and higher harmonics will make
up a
greater part of the distortion than before."

According to Wilson that is "a lie". Really?

**An half truth. You leave out the obvious fact that IF odd order distortion
is reduced to inaudibility (which it is in all competently designed amps),
then it is irrelevant what part of the distortion is even or odd. I said I
was addressing your lies and half truths.

It is in fact a fact
(heh-heh) agreed between all informed parties that the NFB, while
reducing the *total* amount of distortion, by its very nature alters
the frequency distribution of the remaining distortion so that the odd
and higher harmonics make up a greater proportion of the recombinant
residual. That is several times spelt out in my original article which
causes Wilson to foam at the mouth. So tell us, Trevor-baby, how is my
statement lie?

**It is a half truth.


I can't resist. Here's another statement (a rhetorical question,
actually) this blockhead Wilson singles out as "a lie":

"And they still use Negative Feedback?"

Uh, duh, Trevor-baby, are you now claiming that the entire audio world
has stopped using NFB? Amazing.

**Nope. It is a half truth. EVERYONE uses NFB. Every single amplifier
designer. Even you. By not spelling what type of NFB you are telling half
truths.


Below my signature I reprint Wilson's entire hysterical (and
hysterically funny) letter in full for connoisseurs of audio
fruitcakery.

What a blockhead.

**I note that you still cannot answer my questions. Not bad for a
"blockhead" huh? If you are so smart, then prove it, by demonstrating that
each and every one of my points is incorrect.

I'll wait.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Wilson, you're quite mad. If I wrote according to your demands, every
sentence would be two thousand words long and require 200 footnotes
(another 10K words between them!) to cover all eventualities, and then
you would pick nits out of what is left of your hair about the order of
the footnotes.

Since you're so convinced NFB is the Second Coming, you're welcome to
write a full commentary on my piece and send it to me to publish on my
netsite. We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...

I don't imagine that, dragging around an attitude like yours, you do
much business, but still, if it is your living perhaps you should not
sign your business-name to these tirades that do nothing more than make
you look ineffably stupid and offensive.

Andre Jute

(1) Google for "DC on the core"
(2) Google for the "Bubbaland 300B"

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Trevor Wilson wrote:
Here are a few of your lies (some of which you have backtracked on):

And then this nutter Wilson lists:

**A whole big bunch of your lies. Nothing more.


-- a set of incontrovertible facts agreed by all parties, without
explaining how the facts straight out of the RDH can be a lie

**Cite your alleged "incontrovertible facts". I'll wait. I have copy of
RDH4. Just give me the page and chapter reference numbers.


-- a set of my opinions on matters of taste, without explaining how a
cultural taste can be a lie

**I have not argued with your opinions. Just your lies.


-- and so on into astounding subdivisions of irrationality and
stupidity

**Really? How about discussing your lies then? Let's see if you can manage
it, without profanity and insults. Just calmly and rationally discuss my
points, one by one. I bet you can't.


Let's take just one example of what Wilson declares a lie.

**No, let's discuss the entirety of my post.

I wrote:

"Let me say that again: after NFB, third and higher harmonics will make
up a
greater part of the distortion than before."

According to Wilson that is "a lie". Really?

**An half truth. You leave out the obvious fact that IF odd order distortion
is reduced to inaudibility (which it is in all competently designed amps),
then it is irrelevant what part of the distortion is even or odd. I said I
was addressing your lies and half truths.

It is in fact a fact
(heh-heh) agreed between all informed parties that the NFB, while
reducing the *total* amount of distortion, by its very nature alters
the frequency distribution of the remaining distortion so that the odd
and higher harmonics make up a greater proportion of the recombinant
residual. That is several times spelt out in my original article which
causes Wilson to foam at the mouth. So tell us, Trevor-baby, how is my
statement lie?

**It is a half truth.


I can't resist. Here's another statement (a rhetorical question,
actually) this blockhead Wilson singles out as "a lie":

"And they still use Negative Feedback?"

Uh, duh, Trevor-baby, are you now claiming that the entire audio world
has stopped using NFB? Amazing.

**Nope. It is a half truth. EVERYONE uses NFB. Every single amplifier
designer. Even you. By not spelling what type of NFB you are telling half
truths.


Below my signature I reprint Wilson's entire hysterical (and
hysterically funny) letter in full for connoisseurs of audio
fruitcakery.

What a blockhead.

**I note that you still cannot answer my questions. Not bad for a
"blockhead" huh? If you are so smart, then prove it, by demonstrating that
each and every one of my points is incorrect.

I'll wait.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're quite mad. If I wrote according to your demands, every
sentence would be two thousand words long and require 200 footnotes
(another 10K words between them!) to cover all eventualities, and then
you would pick nits out of what is left of your hair about the order of
the footnotes.

**Then do so. I'll wait. We both know you can't. In fact, I'll make it easy
for you: Let's just discuss one, lone lie. YOU justify your lie about a
triode being more linear than a MODERN BJT. Not a 30 year old one, but an
up-to-date device.


Since you're so convinced NFB is the Second Coming,

**Nothing of the sort. NFB is unavoidable, that's all. NFB is used in EVERY
SINGLE amplifier on the planet. It's just the type and amount of NFB which
varies. A point you manage to neatly avoid in everything you write. You
additionally manage to avoid the fact that transistor amps can be built
which do not use Global NFB, if required.

you're welcome to
write a full commentary on my piece and send it to me to publish on my
netsite.

**You already have my criticism of what you wrote.

We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...

I don't imagine that, dragging around an attitude like yours, you do
much business, but still, if it is your living perhaps you should not
sign your business-name to these tirades that do nothing more than make
you look ineffably stupid and offensive.

**As opposed to your complete inability to answer my questions and points?
Yeah, sure.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...


Andre Jute is not responsible for Mike Lefevre's woes. Mike Lefevre
is. People got tired of his rank dishonesty and ineptitude. Andre got
on the bandwagon when it became apparent he was going down. Not that
Lefevre deserves any sympathy.

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...


We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...


Andre Jute is not responsible for Mike Lefevre's woes.

Andre Jute/McCoy/Munchausen is barely responsible for himself let alone
anybody else's success or falure.

Mike Lefevre
is. People got tired of his rank dishonesty and ineptitude. Andre got
on the bandwagon when it became apparent he was going down. Not that
Lefevre deserves any sympathy.

They have that in common.

Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.
Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites. I'm not queer, I see no need to
defend tubes against every passing hanger-on of the silicon slime (to
me you and MIckey McMickey sound equally uninformed and equally
deranged), and I see absolutely no reason to defend either my opinions
or my facts against some salesman with commercially inspired contrary
opinions. If you want to come with chapter and verse about negative
feedback, with all sources fully cited and a logically reasoned
development, by all means do so; we will then pay you the respect of
serious discussion but you should be aware that we are unlikely to
change our taste at the bidding of anyone as singularly lacking in
charm as you. Until you do bring facts and reasoning and persuasion
rather than your present bullying thuggery, your kibbitzing is just
your opinion--and it isn't worth even a fraction of my opinion. You're
in my killfile as a waste of time until I see others discussing some
serious point you made, if ever you manage to make one.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're quite mad. If I wrote according to your demands, every
sentence would be two thousand words long and require 200 footnotes
(another 10K words between them!) to cover all eventualities, and then
you would pick nits out of what is left of your hair about the order of
the footnotes.

**Then do so. I'll wait. We both know you can't. In fact, I'll make it easy
for you: Let's just discuss one, lone lie. YOU justify your lie about a
triode being more linear than a MODERN BJT. Not a 30 year old one, but an
up-to-date device.


Since you're so convinced NFB is the Second Coming,

**Nothing of the sort. NFB is unavoidable, that's all. NFB is used in EVERY
SINGLE amplifier on the planet. It's just the type and amount of NFB which
varies. A point you manage to neatly avoid in everything you write. You
additionally manage to avoid the fact that transistor amps can be built
which do not use Global NFB, if required.

you're welcome to
write a full commentary on my piece and send it to me to publish on my
netsite.

**You already have my criticism of what you wrote.

We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...

I don't imagine that, dragging around an attitude like yours, you do
much business, but still, if it is your living perhaps you should not
sign your business-name to these tirades that do nothing more than make
you look ineffably stupid and offensive.

**As opposed to your complete inability to answer my questions and points?
Yeah, sure.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.

**Nope. I claim that in your original post, you lied. Many times. You are as
entitled to your OPINIONS as much as anyone else. When you lie, however, I
(and others) will take you to task.

Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

**Nope. YOU claimed that triodes were the most linear amplification device.
Up until the development of modern transistors, that may have been the case.
It has not been the case for many years, however.

I'm not queer, I see no need to
defend tubes against every passing hanger-on of the silicon slime (to
me you and MIckey McMickey sound equally uninformed and equally
deranged), and I see absolutely no reason to defend either my opinions
or my facts against some salesman with commercially inspired contrary
opinions.

**You don't have to defend your opinions. When you state alleged facts,
however, you will be called to task.

If you want to come with chapter and verse about negative
feedback, with all sources fully cited and a logically reasoned
development,

**What do you want to know? You seem to be unable to distinguish between
Global NFB, local NFB, nested NFB and any other sort. Is that correct? Or do
you actually KNOW that there are basic and fundamental differences between
the different NFB schemes and you choose not to explain that to your
readers?

by all means do so; we will then pay you the respect of
serious discussion but you should be aware that we are unlikely to
change our taste at the bidding of anyone as singularly lacking in
charm as you.

**Charm is for getting laid. We are discussing facts (or lack of, in your
case). If you were an attractive woman and I did not live with a homicidal
female, I would be charming to you.

Until you do bring facts and reasoning and persuasion
rather than your present bullying thuggery, your kibbitzing is just
your opinion

**Then feel free to discuss my "opinions" and rebutt them with facts. I'll
wait.


--and it isn't worth even a fraction of my opinion. You're
in my killfile as a waste of time until I see others discussing some
serious point you made, if ever you manage to make one.

**Typical wimp.


Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're quite mad. If I wrote according to your demands, every
sentence would be two thousand words long and require 200 footnotes
(another 10K words between them!) to cover all eventualities, and then
you would pick nits out of what is left of your hair about the order of
the footnotes.

**Then do so. I'll wait. We both know you can't. In fact, I'll make it
easy
for you: Let's just discuss one, lone lie. YOU justify your lie about a
triode being more linear than a MODERN BJT. Not a 30 year old one, but an
up-to-date device.


Since you're so convinced NFB is the Second Coming,

**Nothing of the sort. NFB is unavoidable, that's all. NFB is used in
EVERY
SINGLE amplifier on the planet. It's just the type and amount of NFB
which
varies. A point you manage to neatly avoid in everything you write. You
additionally manage to avoid the fact that transistor amps can be built
which do not use Global NFB, if required.

you're welcome to
write a full commentary on my piece and send it to me to publish on my
netsite.

**You already have my criticism of what you wrote.

We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...

I don't imagine that, dragging around an attitude like yours, you do
much business, but still, if it is your living perhaps you should not
sign your business-name to these tirades that do nothing more than make
you look ineffably stupid and offensive.

**As opposed to your complete inability to answer my questions and
points?
Yeah, sure.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

On 26 Mar 2006 17:16:29 -0800, "Andre Jute" wrote:

Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.
Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern BJT can be more
linear *without feedback* than your beloved DHTs. Surely a *true*
'ultrafidelista' would see this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent'
amplifier? Better linearity and no humming heaters?

I'm not queer, I see no need to
defend tubes against every passing hanger-on of the silicon slime (to
me you and MIckey McMickey sound equally uninformed and equally
deranged),

Typical of your ignorance to be unaware that there is *vastly* more
silicon in a tube amp than a BJT one.

and I see absolutely no reason to defend either my opinions
or my facts against some salesman with commercially inspired contrary
opinions.

Interesting, since the only real job you ever had was as a salesman.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com