"Ruud Broens" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ink.net...
:
: "Forwarder" wrote in message
: .. .
: dave weil wrote:
:
:
:
: Wouldn't it be embarassing to your side if people couldn't even tell
: the difference between an SET and a "normal" amp? What would that
tell
: you about the efficacy of blind testing? And if you were correct
about
: the "inferiority" of the amp, wouldn't it be a slam dunk? Funny then
: how you don't bother investigating...perhaps there's a reason...
:
: Very good point. I would say that anyone would be extremeley hard
pressed
: to single out the SET amp reliably in a DBT or ABX.
:
: Depends on how much power is being used for one thing. Distortion is
: another. See my post "From RAHE, article on distortion" and you will
find :
: For detecting distortion at levels of less than 10%, the test
frequencies
: had to be greater than 500 Hz. At 40 Hz, listeners accepted 100%
distortion
: before they complained. The noise test tones had to reach 8,000 Hz and
above
: before 1% distortion became audible, such is the masking effect of
music.
:
That should surely read: "such appeared to be the masking effect of
noise", eh ?
:-)

Have to take that up with the people who ran the tests.

Does this mean, mr McKelvy, that a SET amplifier producing 1% or less THD
at avg. listening levels is ok with you now ?

inquiring minds like 2 know ;-)
R.

No. I still want there to be as close to zero distortion and zero noise as
is possible.
They have other problems besides THD.
Second harmonic
Power supply hum goes to the speakers
Microphony
The limits for the kind of speakers that can be used, is the real deal
killer fo me.