Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond
 

Andy Evans wrote:

Go for a decent SS amp? ;-)

After all you know about me? The words of a certain tennis player come to
mind........


"COME ON!!!" ?


;)

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:56:49 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


'Cos the point is, if you have to go and buy a *good* amp (when we are
told all ss amps over £300 qualify as 'good' ??)

**I never said anything of the kind. Moreover, I don't beleive that anyone
ever said anything like that.

Oh yes they did - it wuz Pinkypoof.


More typical ******** from the hairy-arsed ex-trucker. I never said
any such thing, indeed I'll point you to Tim de Paravicini's
solid-state version of his Yoshino, which is a *very* bad amp, and
costs lots more than £300.

why is it "bad"?

- it isn't a wire with gain?
- lots of audible distortion?
- it "sounds" like a valve amp?


btw, Marshall used to (still do?) make a line of guitar amps called the
"Valvestate" series. The amps were SS amps that were meant to sound like
valve amps (so I assume they sounded pleasant when overdriven) and were
cheaper than valve amps.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

In article ,
Kurt Hamster wrote:
Then why waste so much of your time posting here? After all there's
nothing more to be said if you believe your above statement. Just listen
to your music and enjoy it.

Because I don't spend all day listening to music, I'm sat at the PC most
of the time and it fills in spaces when I'm waiting for the computer to
do something.

That explains everything. Didn't think you'd got an interest in audio.

--
*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

In article ,
Kurt Hamster wrote:
Who said anything about me winning anything. I've already made my
statement based on the demonstrative proof of my gas bills.

The proof based on taking two courses of action and assigning the
improvement to the wrong one.

You haven't proved anything, you've just propounded a theory.

But you carry on - it's your money your wasting.

Actually, if you recall, this sub thread came about because I was saving
money. Apparently you think I'm not.

That's what I like about know-it-alls like you, I'm the one with all the
data, but you still think you know-it-all.

I'm surprised anyone can be so thick as you and still manage to breathe.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Kurt Hamster wrote:

I stated that a decent linear system was 'better' because it can be eq'd
to any particular taste.

To turn it on its head... "What if the valve amps distortion has a
non-reversible transfer function? un-eq-ing distortion is not always
possible"

What if I wanted that sound?

All the time or some of it?

If the latter then you want the linear setup.

If the former, you could use either, although the valve amp looks prettier.

either way, you can forget talking about 'hi fi' if you do that kind of
thing.

you then said that "the converse is also true given the relevant EQ etc
etc etc..." (as quoted above).

when I point out the converse is NOT always true, you start obfuscating
and avoiding the issue.

Because as per normal you're talking about theoretical what-ifs, I'm
talking real world.

Theres nothing theoretical about it. If the transfer function is
non-reversible then there will be cases where you cant get the sound you
want from the non-linear setup. End of.

What thermostat?

Room thermostat as opposed to radiator thermostat (though if you have
them it helps of course).

Quite.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Tat Chan wrote:

btw, Marshall used to (still do?) make a line of guitar amps called the
"Valvestate" series. The amps were SS amps that were meant to sound like
valve amps (so I assume they sounded pleasant when overdriven) and were
cheaper than valve amps.

Probably a similar idea to Peaveys 'transtube' amps...

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Nick Gorham wrote:

Yes, I agree with all you have replied to on this thread, and do
understand the first part of understanding the problem is the creation
of a agreed language to describe what we are looking at.

Problem is, I am not sure just where to go next :-(

Try DBTs.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

The difficulty here is that we have no well-founded theory or set of
observations that allow us to define the required 'effect' in functional
terms we could consider implimenting in engineering. Until we do, it
remains hard to say what might or might not be buildable to achive the
(ill-defined) result.

I'd settle for simply being able to demonstrate that the effect is
audible in DBTs by those who claim to hear it.

If the effects existence can be verified, THEN Im interested in tracking
it down.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Kurt Hamster wrote:
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:48:48 +0000, Ian Molton used
to say...


Most of us here *have* tried one. but when one already has an
essentially perfect amp, why would one need to improve on that?


You're an expert on valve amps aren't you Ian?

Not at all, but I've owned one, rebuilt one with a friend, and heard a
good number more over the years.

I happen to actually like the 'valve sound' but wouldnt want to apply it
to everything.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Kurt Hamster wrote:

If I know Keith then yes probably. Desperate wannabees seem to bring out
the worst in both of us,

Im sure theres something deep and meaningful to read into that but at
3:00 am I really dont care.

Btw, he posted a reasonable question.

Not really given that Keith has never tried to deny that his beloved
valve amps produce audible distortion. He continually states that 1) he
doesn't care 2) he can't hear it anyway.

That wasnt my question. My question asked why Keith couldnt accept the
'cold harsh sound' of SS amps was due to a LACK of audible distortion.

I said nothing about wether valve amps distort.