On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:33:08 +0100, "Ruud Broens"
wrote:


"Ruud Broens" wrote in message
. ..
:
: "Ruud Broens" wrote in message
: ...
: : As there have been some 3 dozen postings,
: : with an added CQ Arny Don Stewart in the header
: : in a RAT thread on hybrid design
:
: : we may conclude:
: :
: : 1
: : Jenn is right, Andre! Nobody reads the headers
: : (they're just your organizational placeholders)
: :
: : 2
: : The SS team does not have any ideas or up-to-date
: : data on a subject clearly in their ballpark , 2
: :
: : 3
: : The SS team is not interested in discussing topics,
: : at all, just pickin' the occasional nit will do just fine
: :
: :
: : native RATs vs 'invited' ~RATs~
: :
: : 36 0
: :
: : ball's in your court
: : Rudy
: : :-)
4
recently, the Pinkerton Parliament ruled:
"My 'differences' with tubies are not that fundamental in the sense
: that I recognise tube amps as very attractive to the hobbyist, but I
: will point out the technical shortcomings, and I will blow away the
: smoke abd nmirrors, and general bull**** surrounding them. As for
: 'tubecraft', I'm sorry, but this technology was fully mature forty
: years ago, pretty much when valves became obsolete in audio
: amplifiers. If you want to play with different circuit configurations
: to see what they do, that's fine as a hobby, but optimised tube
: circuits have been done to death for *decades*."

as PP plays the sound of silence :

thanks for admitting there were no technical shortcomings

None that haven't been previously discussed to death, certainly. After
all, were you expecting some *new* shortcomings to appear in a
technology that peaked half a century ago?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

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