"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
[clip]

I prefer SS for this and all other music listening. More natural,
and I know natural because I record.


"I know natural because I record" :-) Love it

Just listened to your recording, Arny.
Don't give up your daytime job:-))

Bite me, Ian.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
[clip]

I prefer SS for this and all other music listening. More natural,
and I know natural because I record.


"I know natural because I record" :-) Love it

Truth be known, I am among a relatively tiny minority of listeners who
actually heard the exact live performance that they have a recording of.
The rest of the zombies are guessing.


Was the recording that bad :-)

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain M Churches
wrote:

Can you give any figures for what percentage of all those who 'listen to
Stravinsky' choose to do so via SET amplifiers?

From talking to people in music groups and on RAT, the term SET comes
up remarkably often. In my own music circle I know of three people - more
than I would have imagined.

I'm not clear why the group you pick out should be of particular
significance. But since you make a statement about them, I'd be interested
to know the answer to my question.

It seems that SET performs especially well with small classical ensembles.


In addition, if we are considering selected groups. What percentage of
those who are involved in professional recording, mixing, etc, always do
so
using SET amplifiers for their monitoring/listening at the time?

From my own experience? None:-)
But I do know of several (myself among them) who monitor with a large
PP valve amp.

Iain

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
[clip]

I prefer SS for this and all other music listening. More natural,
and I know natural because I record.


"I know natural because I record" :-) Love it

Just listened to your recording, Arny.
Don't give up your daytime job:-))

Bite me, Ian.

Ssshh Arny. Don't say that kind of thing. People
will get the wrong idea:-)))

Iain

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Ian Bell" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Do they disagree with the idea that P-P can completely cancel even
order nonlinear distortion?

I may be wrong but I thought P-P intrinsically *only* produces even
ordered harmonics.

You do have it wrong. P-P intrinsically *only* produces odd ordered
harmonics.


Yup. Had to draw me a picture to make sure but you are right. Must be old
age creeping on.

Ian
--
Ian Bell

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Iain M Churches
wrote:



Just a few days ago, he invited me to listen to a recording of
Shostakovich String Quartet No.3 Op.73 in F major, on which he played.
He uses a Russian built SET amplifier and a pair of Quad ELS.

Which amplifier, and which speakers?

Slainte,

Jim

The amp was built by a Russian engineer called Anton Reznikov,
and the speakers by an English engineer called Peter Walker
late 70's? I am sure you know the type number better than I.
The CD player was a Studer A730.

Iain

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:25:37 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Put complex sounds in or attach the wrong speaker and your typical
SET will sound like ****.

I am sure we all agree that they are no appropriate for all types of
music, but for those who listen to small ensembles, SET can sound
remarkably
good.

Contrasts with SS amps which sound good with a wide variety of music and
speakers.

But do they sound "remarkably good?" :-))

The sound remarkably like their input signal.........

I don't know what motivates people who listen to Stravinsky to buy SET
amps. But the fact is that they do, as a matter of choice.
Can you explain it?

Fashion? Of course, hundreds of times more people listen to Stravinsky
through SS amps, so the choosers of SET amps are no more (or less!)
unusual than are riders of recumbent bicycles. There will *always* be
those who choose to march to the beat of a different drum - somewhat
muffled in the case of SET amps, of course! :-)

My cellist friend plays professionally in a quartet. Each member of
his ensemble, has bought an SET amp after hearing his. If he takes
up a vacancy in a symphony orchestra, he will be able to set up as
a SET amp dealer:-))

The power of suggestion is well known!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I don't know what motivates people who listen to Stravinsky to buy SET
amps. But the fact is that they do, as a matter of choice.
Can you explain it?

Style, boredom, ignorance, more money than brains.

Yes, you could be right. But I doubt it is any of these things.
Could it be that they can hear something that you and I cannot?

My cellist friend plays professionally in a quartet. Each member of
his ensemble, has bought an SET amp after hearing his. If he takes
up a vacancy in a symphony orchestra, he will be able to set up as
a SET amp dealer:-))

Whatever. Obviously they need to practice more or play more.


Sorry Arny. Your subtlety eludes me:-)

Iain

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:07:26 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .

The KISS amp is supposed to be *simple*, not necessarily the best
possible SET amp. Besides, neither I nor anyone else except possibly
Andre has listened to this amp, since he hasn't yet published the
circuit.

Anyone with more than a sniping acquaintance with Andre, would know
that he has been designing and building amplifiers for a very long time.
KISS is by no means his first. I believe that he has had some designs
published, so many have had a chance to build and listen. He has a
very good reputation both as an amp designer and a journalist/music
reviewer.

Irrelevant, since your remark was directed at the KISS, not earlier
designs.

You promised to build an SS amp, to the same performance specification.
Many of those on RAT are eagerly awaiting your design, so that we may build
both your and Andre's amplifier. Please do not disappoint us.

Let us be clear, before revisionism rules - at no time did I *promise*
any such thing. As it happens, I do have a paper design which follows
the KISASS principles of minimum active components (four transistors,
to be precise), no iron apart from the mains transformer, no loop
feedback, and a distortion content dominated by the central
single-ended gain stage. It does use emitter-follower impedance
converters at output and input, but I consider this to be an
appropriate use of SS technology. KISASS is not supposed to be a
*copy* of KISS, it simply follows the same basic principles, applied
to somewhat different active devices.

Do try to keep up, or people may feel that you are not well
informed.

Looking back over some archive posts in this NG, I see that most
threads turn into your "all good SS amps sound the same"
Not much to keep up with, is there? :-))

The truth is often simple...................

Don't believe everything you're told by acolytes of the evil god SET!
If they were 'well informed', they'd be using push-pull amps........

I am sure they are. Many people have more than one amplifier or
pair of speakers. But this still does not distract from the fact that if
one wants to listen to small ensemble music, then SET is quite
remarkable. I add here that I have no axe to grind, I do not own
an SET amp:-)

'Remarkable' it may be, but it is *only* accurate below a watt or two,
demanding extremely sensitive speakers even for chamber music played
at realistic levels. A small class A SS amp such as the classic 1969
Linsley Hood would do a better job for vastly less money.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:52:37 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Tat Chan
wrote:
That is because you can't walk into a hi-fi shop and say "I'll have 50
cubic metres of good acoustics for my room, please. Do I get a discount
if I pay in cash?"


Yes, I suspect you are correct. However the curious thing is that shops
sell things like 'Stones' and wiggly pipes, etc, to improve the sound on a
quasi-mystical basis, but the same shops do not seem to sell more basic
acoustics materials.

Slainte,

Jim

For those living in the UK, the Association of Architects (or whatever the
revered body is called) have a list of those specialised in acoustics.

It's the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), and it does
indeed have such a list, Hepworth Acoustics being one of the principal
consulting firms. Don't expect this advice to come cheaply!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering