Re: That'll Teach Me... (Chinese Valve Amp)



"Nick Gorham" <nick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:KaadnaufCJJbtFHbnZ2dnUVZ8v6dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Serge Auckland wrote:


What amuses me /irritates in equal measure about all the above is that
even staying with valves, a PPUL EL84 amplifier like the Mullard 5-10 or
GEC equivalent has a little more power than the SET, with a whole lot
less distortion and lower output impedance such that is *does* make music
very satisfactorily, without having to make apologies for the SETs
shortcomings. It would also be cheaper to build as a PP output
transformer is considerably cheaper than a half-decent SET one, and a
pair of EL84s cost much less than a single 300B. The only thing I can
think of in a SETs favour is that it looks a lot more dramatic with those
DH big triodes.

S.


Fine, I didn't set out to amuse or irritate you, but if it does, then
thats not my problem.

I was asked by two people on the ng to post what I thought of the sound of
the amp in question, one being its owner, I did so because of that, I
wouldn't have done so otherwise. Especially as I could have (and still
might have) offended the amps owner.

I don't think at any point I made any apologies for anything's
shortcomings, I just posted my own subjective impressions. I made a point
of specifically describing them as subjective, and being my own.

But somehow, this upsets you enough to feel the need to spout a bunch of
unasked for, unconnected and rather condecending opinions.

Hey, when the owner first asked for help, maybe you should have suggested
he send the thing to the tip, and not to consider that it could be fixed
by replacing a £3 resistor.

I am sure you have saved many of the worlds population from being
corrupted by the existance of certain output device and topology.

--
Nick

Nick, I wasn't getting at you, and I apologise if I gave that impression. I
*was* getting at the current fad for SET amplifiers which were abandoned in
the early part of the last century when PP amplifiers were developed,
overcoming many of the shortcomings of SETs. Why some people persist with
this technology is quite beyond me, other than the same reason some like to
drive vintage MGs, for the sheer fun of it.

SETs have much higher distortion and output impedance than PP amps,
especially those with overall negative feedback. Now, if one likes the sound
of distortion, together with a frequency response that varies with the load,
that's fine, but I would have thought that as alternatives with better
performance are available, it would be better to go that way rather than
persist with something patently flawed.

As to the OP's original problem, it was good that you were able to help, I
would have done the same if he had been local to me. I just wonder why he
was in that position in the first place.

S.

--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Stan White Powrtron amplifier:well suited to modern speakers?
    ... 60s had adjustable positive feedback as well as by-then conventional ... to offset the highish output impedance of valve amplifiers. ... could adjust the output impedance from a few ohms positive to negative. ...
    (rec.audio.tech)
  • Re: Stan White Powrtron amplifier:well suited to modern speakers?
    ... negative feedback. ... to offset the highish output impedance of valve amplifiers. ... could adjust the output impedance from a few ohms positive to negative. ...
    (rec.audio.tech)
  • Re: Loading Coils; was : Vincent antenna
    ... the reflections at the output of an amplifier with a ... well defined output impedance because a typical ... amateur transmitter does not have a well defined ... I know very little about amplifiers, ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Say what you mean.
    ... The phrase "output impedance" in connection with amplifiers is ambiguous and ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
Loading