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

Tat Chan wrote:

that the function of valves as an amplifiing device is now obsolete as
it has been replaced by something cheaper and more efficient? (i.e. the
transistor)


Yep, agree with you there, cheaper and more efficient they are, linear
they are not.

--
Nick

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

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:51:04 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:08:43 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton used
to say...

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:33:53 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:23:18 +1100, Tat Chan used
to say...

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.

Not the point, as he insists that SS amps also have audible
distortion, but of a less pleasant kind. This is bull****.

Does it really matter?

Not to me, since I am happy to accept reality, but apparently it's of
*vital* importance to valvies.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

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

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote

I can just imagine how well your Latin goes down, when speaking to the
blokes down at the local, or at the footy.

Oh you know those rugby chaps at the gentlemens club ... they are all
defined by the school they went to 30 years ago ... I'm sure they will
relish the chance to practice their Latin ...


Er, that's over 40 years ago and, no, I think people who drop Latin
phrases are ****s - I'm only doing it to **** Trevor off! :-)

(No way is it a dead language though - there's one or two here would do
well to think a little parochially...)


OK, found this 'less' laying on the table after I had posted that....

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

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:40:15 GMT, Trevor Wilson used
to say...


"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


**That would explain a great deal. I wish I'd known earlier. I have a
policy of not arguing with drunks, drug addicts, children and the
aged.


Hmm, I'm 57, 100% teetotal and don't do drugs other than 'normal'
ciggies - so how do I qualify then, eh, Captain Copout??

**I have news for you: "'normal'" ciggies are an highly efficient
delivery system for the most deadly drug in society. If you imagine
that
the hit you recieve (within seconds) to your brain helps your thinking,
you are in for a shock. Nicotine shrinks blood vessels, thus
restricting
oxygenated blood to the brain.


So? Your point being....???

**You're a drug addict. You're addicted to a drug which alters your
ability
to think rationally (particularly, if you are undergoing withdrawal).

Since when has nicotine (in normal dosages, eg 20 a day) been so
depressive to the CNS that it affects rational thought?

**Always. Nothing has altered, except the understanding of how insidious the
drug actually is. I will give nicotine it's dues, however. Nicotine is an
excellent insecticide.





I think you need to try a little harder, remember what they say:
"Diligentia maximum etiam mediocris ingeni subsidium!"

(Still don't get it? Oh well - "Such is life!!" ;-)

Don't suppose you know who said that either, do you......???

**I know who said it, here in Australia. In Pommyland, no.


Pommyland? Aw, how twee....! ;-)

**As any Pom who visits Australia will attest, the term: 'Pommyland' quite
normal.

Not in a UK NG it isn't.

**Consider your education expanded.




OK, so what famous Australian said it then?

**Ned Kelly, of course. Every Australian schoolkid knows that.

Not too many Australian schoolkids in this UK newsgroup is there?

**Dunno. You tell me. If you have a way of determining who reads what
newsgroups, you should be very, very wealthy.



(Kinda gives the game away dunnit? - *Famous Australian*!!?? - There was
only the *one*!!! :-)

**Nope. There have been a few.

Outside Oz he means!

**Yep. There's:
Dame Edna Everage (aka Barry Humphries)
Kylie Minogue
Rolf Harris







Ho hum....


(Jeez, ya hafta fekkin' larf.... :-))

**I do. Particularly at one who claims not to be a drug addict, then
sucks down nicotine.


Check the words 'other than' (more of an acknowledgement than you would
get from *most* that cigarettes are a drug...) in my statement above and
then get a grip of yerself.....

**You don't get to use the words: "other than 'normal' ciggies" and claim
not to be a drug addict. You may as well have said: "Except for my daily
dose of heroin, I'm not a drug addict." The only significant differences
being:

Errr, nicotine isn't classed as a drug, it's classed as a
chemical/poison. Technically addiction to smoking is chemical dependency
rather than drug addiction.

**You say tomato and I say tomato.


* Heroin is less deadly.
* Heroin is illegal.
* Heroin is FAR easier to quit.

Heroin mimics what we already have in our systems, i.e. endorphins and
as such develops the same type of chemical receptors in the brain.
Nicotine also develops chemical receptors hence the addiction. After the
chemical receptors have formed in the brain we become addicted as the
body is conned into thinking it's a required chemical.

**Yep. It is a completely nasty drug. Very tough to give up. Why anyone with
half a brain would even consider taking up the addiction, is beyond me.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

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

"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:



so a SS amp can be designed to sound like a valve amp?


Difficult to find an advert for an ss amp in a UK comic that doesn't use
the word 'valvelike' at some point, these days......


I wouldn't know, as I don't read the ads. Though I do know that I will not
be buying a SS amp from a company that claims it sounds 'valve like' ...


OK, don't bother coming to, er, Pommyland, to shop for amps atm, then....

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

Kurt Hamster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:45:20 +0000, Ian Molton used
to say...


Kurt Hamster wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:28:15 +0000, Ian Molton used
to say...



IOW, the ear introduces the same distortion all the time, so introducing
more distortion wont help.


Why won't it help? Ever heard of noise cancellation technology?

Yes I have - but thats about cancelling *unwanted* noise.

If distortion isn't noise then what is it?

micks claim was that there have been measurements with a sensor in the
inner ear showing that the ear itself distorts sound. thats not noise,
however since its part of our perceptual systems. Im reluctant to say
the brain compensates for it, but it will clearly expect the distortion
caused by the ears mechanisms to be present.

the distortion applied by your ears is present even when you hear the
music *live*, first hand.

The ears don't apply any distortion. YOu really don't understand
psycho-acoustics do you?

I wasnt talking about psychoacoustics. neither was micks only point
about psychoacoustics.

Im not going to argue this further with you [Kurt] as you have been
misrepresenting what I've said each time in your replies. this is the
last comment from me on this subject (in reply to you).

mick - if you wish to continue discussing this Im happy to respond to you.

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

Nick Gorham wrote:
Tat Chan wrote:

that the function of valves as an amplifiing device is now obsolete as
it has been replaced by something cheaper and more efficient? (i.e.
the transistor)


Yep, agree with you there, cheaper and more efficient they are, linear
they are not.

Whats your point?

Most active components are non-linear in some way or another. Valves and
trannies included.

The *interesting* point is that you can (using appropriate design) make
a linear amp using these components.

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

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:31:09 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:24:50 GMT, Don Pearce used
to say...

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:20:41 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:31:09 GMT, Don Pearce used
to say...

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:59:33 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

I don't think anyone will argue that valves are old technology, but does
that as such have any bearing on anything ?

Are you suggesting that new is always better ?

Transistors aren't exactly state of the art either are they?

Er.... yes - they are actually. Unless you know of something more
advanced.


Ah so you agree that old technology (57 years old) CAN be state of the
art then?

Oh I do like it when pedants pounce on what they think is a mistake :)


Listen carefully. Transistors are state of the art because they are
where all the research is happening - they are moving forwards with
new and better geometries, and advances in integration.

Valves stopped evolving many years ago, and represent an obsolete art
with no current "state".

OK?

Nope, you can waffle as much as you like the transistor was invented in
1947. The transistor itself hasn't evolved much since then.

Ignorant ****. The 'transistor', in the sense of the solid-state
amplification device, has improved *massively* since then. OTOH,
valvies are still scrabbling after enormously expensive NOS Western
Electric 300Bs made before WWII started..............

Most
technology BASED on transistors is still evolving e.g. microchips,
surface mount technology etc, but even then most of that evolution is
based on how many can fit in a finite space and how to get them to work
without setting themselves alight.

The principle of the transistor has not involved, it doesn't matter how
its physical form takes it's still 57 year old technology. If I was 57 I
wouldn't consider myself to be young, would you?

Your ignorance of engineering evolution is noted. Funny how that all
changes when valvies whine that VAIC et al are designing new versions
of the 300B..................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

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

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:09:16 GMT, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote:


"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:06:43 GMT, Trevor Wilson used
to say...


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**I'm waiting to hear your point. More correctly: Your excuse for your
terrible writing style and your general inability to understand basic
logic and reason. Perhaps you paid too much attention to a long dead
(and useless) language, rather than useful subjects.

Brain damage from years of alcohol abuse.

**That would explain a great deal. I wish I'd known earlier. I have a
policy
of not arguing with drunks, drug addicts, children and the aged.

That puts Pinky out of the equation then eh?

**Dunno. Is Pinky an alcoholic, or a drug addict? He certainly doesn't give
the illusion of being one. His arguments are always logical, coherent and
sane. I may not always agree with him, but he usually has something of value
to say.

Aw, shucks! :-)

Borderline alcoholic, but with good taste in classic reds, I will
always insist! :-)

OTOH, at 56, the 'aged' tag has a certain sting............ :-(

Still, since all my opponents appear to have a mental age in single
figures, I'm not overly concerned. :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

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

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:52:19 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...

As I said, you can waffle as much as you like. Transistor technology is
57 years old, any new advances are still based on old technology.

To use your analogy then doesn't that preclude, $DEITY forbid, someone
using valves on a state of the art computer motherboard?

Still manufacturing tellys with valves (tubes) in, ain't they??? :-)

You might have thought that was a clever cheap shot, but as always,
your ignorance shows. Actually, no, they're not. Several of the
mainstream manufacturers have stopped making *any* CRT TVs.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering