"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:04:10 -0000, "Richard Wall"
wrote:

No - it is merely revealing your faulty assumptions. The test is
working perfectly. However you should be able to discern the appalling
sound of a SET in any kind of test - blind or not.

Here you show both your ignorance and your bias !! A opinion back by no
facts at all just an opinion of poorly designed SET systems you have heard
before.

The problem is that there's no such thing as a *well* designed SET amp
- by definition! :-)

That's why push-pull operation was invented in the '20s, and only
audiofools want to go back to before those days...............

Interesting that most of the well informed members of RAT tended to
disagree with you vehently on this point. They if anyone have experience
with SET. Have you actually taken the trouble to listen to a good SET
(for example Andre's Kiss amplifier) playing Shostokovich ¨
String Quartets or a small chamber ensemble? Quite remarkable:-)
Your Krell, and most other amplifiers, I am told, fade in comparison.

Not recommended though for fans of Metalica:-)

Iain

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:13:04 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:04:10 -0000, "Richard Wall"
wrote:

No - it is merely revealing your faulty assumptions. The test is
working perfectly. However you should be able to discern the appalling
sound of a SET in any kind of test - blind or not.

Here you show both your ignorance and your bias !! A opinion back by no
facts at all just an opinion of poorly designed SET systems you have heard
before.

The problem is that there's no such thing as a *well* designed SET amp
- by definition! :-)

That's why push-pull operation was invented in the '20s, and only
audiofools want to go back to before those days...............

Interesting that most of the well informed members of RAT tended to
disagree with you vehently on this point. They if anyone have experience
with SET. Have you actually taken the trouble to listen to a good SET
(for example Andre's Kiss amplifier) playing Shostokovich ¨
String Quartets or a small chamber ensemble? Quite remarkable:-)
Your Krell, and most other amplifiers, I am told, fade in comparison.

Not recommended though for fans of Metalica:-)

Iain


A SET amplifier is an effects box - nothing more or less. If you
happen to enjoy the effect it produces, then that is fine. But please
don't imagine that it has anything to do with high fidelity
reproduction of music.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:13:04 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
. ..

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:04:10 -0000, "Richard Wall"
wrote:


No - it is merely revealing your faulty assumptions. The test is
working perfectly. However you should be able to discern the appalling
sound of a SET in any kind of test - blind or not.

Here you show both your ignorance and your bias !! A opinion back by no
facts at all just an opinion of poorly designed SET systems you have heard
before.

The problem is that there's no such thing as a *well* designed SET amp
- by definition! :-)

That's why push-pull operation was invented in the '20s, and only
audiofools want to go back to before those days...............

Interesting that most of the well informed members of RAT tended to
disagree with you vehently on this point. They if anyone have experience
with SET. Have you actually taken the trouble to listen to a good SET
(for example Andre's Kiss amplifier) playing Shostokovich ¨
String Quartets or a small chamber ensemble? Quite remarkable:-)
Your Krell, and most other amplifiers, I am told, fade in comparison.

Not recommended though for fans of Metalica:-)

Iain



A SET amplifier is an effects box - nothing more or less. If you
happen to enjoy the effect it produces, then that is fine. But please
don't imagine that it has anything to do with high fidelity
reproduction of music.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Disagree - heard music through one recently, stunning.

Rob

"Rob" wrote in message

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:13:04 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:04:10 -0000, "Richard Wall"
wrote:


No - it is merely revealing your faulty assumptions. The test is
working perfectly. However you should be able to discern the
appalling sound of a SET in any kind of test - blind or not.

Here you show both your ignorance and your bias !! A opinion
back by no facts at all just an opinion of poorly designed SET
systems you have heard before.

The problem is that there's no such thing as a *well* designed SET
amp - by definition! :-)

That's why push-pull operation was invented in the '20s, and only
audiofools want to go back to before those days...............

Interesting that most of the well informed members of RAT tended to
disagree with you vehently on this point.

Which point?

Do they disagree with the idea that P-P was invented in the 1920s?

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

They if anyone have experience with SET.

No surprise that people who like the sound of audible nonlinear distortion
would object to P-P.

Have you actually taken the trouble to listen
to a good SET (for example Andre's Kiss amplifier) playing
Shostokovich ¨ String Quartets or a small chamber ensemble?

Letsee, I'm supposed to get turned on by good clasical music being played
through an EFX box?

How about playing classical music through one of those amplifiers with
attached speakers that says "Fender" on it?

Added reverb, anyone? ;-)

Quite
remarkable:-) Your Krell, and most other amplifiers, I am told,
fade in comparison.

Sad how it is that they are sonically accurate amplifiers.

Not recommended though for fans of Metalica:-)

A SET amplifier is an effects box - nothing more or less.

Agreed.

If you
happen to enjoy the effect it produces, then that is fine. But please
don't imagine that it has anything to do with high fidelity
reproduction of music.

Agreed.

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Disagree - heard music through one recently, stunning.

Only proves Don's point.

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.

Ian

--
Ian Bell

"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.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 21:28:05 -0500, "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.

We have to be a little careful here. A P-P output stage, if the halves
are perfectly matched, will cancel even harmonics produced *by that
stage*, but will of course pass through even harmonics from the input
and driver stages.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article , 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.

Assuming perfectly matched devices in a perfectly balanced arrangement.

However any lack of perfect symmetry may mean that some orders are reduced,
but not removed entirely. Hence in reality you can expect a reduction, but
not a complete removal of the relevant components. Against this, the other
orders may be increased.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

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

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 17:56:45 +0000, Rob
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

A SET amplifier is an effects box - nothing more or less. If you
happen to enjoy the effect it produces, then that is fine. But please
don't imagine that it has anything to do with high fidelity
reproduction of music.

Disagree - heard music through one recently, stunning.

We know they sound *nice* - but not *accurate*.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering