OK Andy, first off (due to bad snipping - which is on the increase in here)
it looks like you are calling Jim Lesurf a 'valve knocker' which, I'm
certain, is not quite the case.

If that's so I apologise. But let's go back to the beginning. I posted website
details for some of Lynn Olsen's arguments in defense of valves. What happened
was:
1. Nobody bothered to read what I posted
2. People seem to just have read the word 'valve' to trigger a childish and
simplistic response - several thought I was Lynn Olsen, though I made it clear
I wasn't
3. I am absolutely FED UP with being patronised by people who continue to say
'well it's alright if you like valves as long as you say it's strictly
subjective (like I'm some sort of freak kept in the East Wing)' Whereas 'we who
like transistors' are of course objective so we don't even need to listen to
know we're right.
4. There's a hell of a lot of careful thought going on in valves - follow Audio
Asylum for some very complex arguments
5. It is POINTLESS thinking that some retro chassis from the sixties is the
cutting edge of valve technology, and just as pointless to think that all valve
amps sound alike and have 'that valve sound' (dreadful phrase) yet all valve
amps seem to be lumped together.
6. I have carefully explained in a number of posts the improvements that can be
made at componant level to radically improve the sound of a valve amp. All this
can be followed in great detail on Audio Asylum in the Tweakers and Tube DIY
sections.
7. I've been a musician for about 40 years and my hearing is absolutely fine
down to fine details. I know exactly what I'm listening for and why.
I could go on, but since I'm largely talking to robots, why should I?

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.