"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.

**Nope. I claim that in your original post, you lied. Many times. You are as
entitled to your OPINIONS as much as anyone else. When you lie, however, I
(and others) will take you to task.

Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

**Nope. YOU claimed that triodes were the most linear amplification device.
Up until the development of modern transistors, that may have been the case.
It has not been the case for many years, however.

I'm not queer, I see no need to
defend tubes against every passing hanger-on of the silicon slime (to
me you and MIckey McMickey sound equally uninformed and equally
deranged), and I see absolutely no reason to defend either my opinions
or my facts against some salesman with commercially inspired contrary
opinions.

**You don't have to defend your opinions. When you state alleged facts,
however, you will be called to task.

If you want to come with chapter and verse about negative
feedback, with all sources fully cited and a logically reasoned
development,

**What do you want to know? You seem to be unable to distinguish between
Global NFB, local NFB, nested NFB and any other sort. Is that correct? Or do
you actually KNOW that there are basic and fundamental differences between
the different NFB schemes and you choose not to explain that to your
readers?

by all means do so; we will then pay you the respect of
serious discussion but you should be aware that we are unlikely to
change our taste at the bidding of anyone as singularly lacking in
charm as you.

**Charm is for getting laid. We are discussing facts (or lack of, in your
case). If you were an attractive woman and I did not live with a homicidal
female, I would be charming to you.

Until you do bring facts and reasoning and persuasion
rather than your present bullying thuggery, your kibbitzing is just
your opinion

**Then feel free to discuss my "opinions" and rebutt them with facts. I'll
wait.


--and it isn't worth even a fraction of my opinion. You're
in my killfile as a waste of time until I see others discussing some
serious point you made, if ever you manage to make one.

**Typical wimp.


Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
ups.com...
Wilson, you're quite mad. If I wrote according to your demands, every
sentence would be two thousand words long and require 200 footnotes
(another 10K words between them!) to cover all eventualities, and then
you would pick nits out of what is left of your hair about the order of
the footnotes.

**Then do so. I'll wait. We both know you can't. In fact, I'll make it
easy
for you: Let's just discuss one, lone lie. YOU justify your lie about a
triode being more linear than a MODERN BJT. Not a 30 year old one, but an
up-to-date device.


Since you're so convinced NFB is the Second Coming,

**Nothing of the sort. NFB is unavoidable, that's all. NFB is used in
EVERY
SINGLE amplifier on the planet. It's just the type and amount of NFB
which
varies. A point you manage to neatly avoid in everything you write. You
additionally manage to avoid the fact that transistor amps can be built
which do not use Global NFB, if required.

you're welcome to
write a full commentary on my piece and send it to me to publish on my
netsite.

**You already have my criticism of what you wrote.

We can do with a comedy section. You should be aware though
that a couple of appearances in the comedy section of my netsite (once
for his ignorance on power supplies (1), once for the same matter of
distortion distribution that so upsets you (2)) cost Mike LeFevre
two-thirds of his existing business and closed out several avenues to
fame and riches just then opening up to him. Several years later he
still hasn't recovered. I'm sure you've wept for him...

I don't imagine that, dragging around an attitude like yours, you do
much business, but still, if it is your living perhaps you should not
sign your business-name to these tirades that do nothing more than make
you look ineffably stupid and offensive.

**As opposed to your complete inability to answer my questions and
points?
Yeah, sure.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

On 26 Mar 2006 17:16:29 -0800, "Andre Jute" wrote:

Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.
Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern BJT can be more
linear *without feedback* than your beloved DHTs. Surely a *true*
'ultrafidelista' would see this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent'
amplifier? Better linearity and no humming heaters?

I'm not queer, I see no need to
defend tubes against every passing hanger-on of the silicon slime (to
me you and MIckey McMickey sound equally uninformed and equally
deranged),

Typical of your ignorance to be unaware that there is *vastly* more
silicon in a tube amp than a BJT one.

and I see absolutely no reason to defend either my opinions
or my facts against some salesman with commercially inspired contrary
opinions.

Interesting, since the only real job you ever had was as a salesman.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Andre remarked that ..........................

Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

A truly DIMWITTED Trevor Wilson replied.....


**Nope. YOU claimed that triodes were the most linear amplification device.
Up until the development of modern transistors, that may have been the case.
It has not been the case for many years, however.

Unfortunately, Trevor has been spewing this drivel about BJTs being more linear
than triodes for years.

They are only as linear as a triode with regard to voltage gain when external
loops of NFB have been applied,
as in the case of the emitter follower connection or having a few BJTs with a
loop of NFB around the
lot of them to correct all their mistakes.

BJTs are inherently non linear for voltage gain and MUST rely on large amounts
of externally connected loops of NFB.

This applies regardless of whether you build a preamp with an opamp, a discrete
transistor preamp,
or any power amp.

Triodes don't, they have a small amount of NFB built into them.

I would ask Trevor to set up a simple 1 transistor preamp with a BC109, and
without any
NFB applied, not even an emitter current feedback resistor, and as a common
emitter voltage amplifier with a supply of 20V.

To understand his own utter stupidity, I ask Trevor to also set up a 6SN7 with a
250V supply to act as a preamp
and without any loop NFB, and he can then tell us all about the results which
will prove what a
jackarse he is.

I insist Trevor compare the results of either device with respect for both
devices and
with respect to us, himself and truthful analysis, but I do believe I am doing
the equivalant of asking a pig to fly.

Until proven otherwise, It can safely be assumed that all of Trevor's knowledge
will fit upon a pinhead.

The only reason TW hangs out here is so he can display how seriously limited he
is.

I delete the rest of TW's bull****e without reading it.

Patrick Turner.

Stewpid Oinkerton squealed....

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern BJT can be more
linear *without feedback* than your beloved DHTs. Surely a *true*
'ultrafidelista' would see this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent'
amplifier? Better linearity and no humming heaters?

The fact is that the modern transistor must rely on NFB for it to be
acceptable in any way.
Every transistor amp must use a lot more NFB to be acceptable than the NFB
that is within
a tube such as a 6SN7.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I cannot agree.

I delete the rest of your silly post; you come here like the pork seller to
the synagogue to sell your pork,
and I ain't buying.

Does it ever occur that you entirely waste your time and ours by trying to
hang out around here?

Patrck Turner.

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message



They are only as linear as a triode with regard to
voltage gain when external loops of NFB have been applied,
as in the case of the emitter follower connection or
having a few BJTs with a loop of NFB around the
lot of them to correct all their mistakes.

BJTs are inherently non linear for voltage gain and MUST
rely on large amounts of externally connected loops of
NFB.

Simply not true. Local feedback works well with BJTs.

This applies regardless of whether you build a preamp
with an opamp, a discrete transistor preamp,
or any power amp.

Triodes don't, they have a small amount of NFB built into
them.

Compared to BJTs, triodes have massive amounts of local NFB built into them,
and they are often used with addtiional local and/or loop NFB.

I would ask Trevor to set up a simple 1 transistor preamp
with a BC109, and without any
NFB applied, not even an emitter current feedback
resistor, and as a common emitter voltage amplifier with
a supply of 20V.

An apples-to-apples comparison would involve comparing circuits with gain
and impedances, both input and output, that are as typical and similar as
possible. However, this comparison is totally ludicrous, because nobody in
their right mind uses a stand-alone BC109 as a high grade audio amplifier
any more. They'll use some kind of an op amp, perhaps a NE 5532 or its
equivalent.

To understand his own utter stupidity, I ask Trevor to
also set up a 6SN7 with a 250V supply to act as a preamp
and without any loop NFB, and he can then tell us all
about the results which will prove what a
jackarse he is.

Illogical comparison. Everybody knows that 6SN7s have a ton of internal
feedback, and that BJTs compare most closely to pentodes, not triodes.

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 26 Mar 2006 17:16:29 -0800, "Andre Jute" wrote:

Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you claim my opinions
and some really basic, totally uncontroversial science are lies because
I haven't dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary point.
Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern BJT can be more
linear *without feedback* than your beloved DHTs. Surely a *true*
'ultrafidelista' would see this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent'
amplifier? Better linearity and no humming heaters?

Erm. Stewart. DHTs don't have "heaters" :-((

Iain

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message

Stewpid Oinkerton squealed....

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern
BJT can be more linear *without feedback* than your
beloved DHTs. Surely a *true* 'ultrafidelista' would see
this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent' amplifier? Better
linearity and no humming heaters?

The fact is that the modern transistor must rely on NFB
for it to be acceptable in any way.

As do the vaccum-state devices that compare best to BJTs - pentodes.

Turner wants us to think that using BJTs with emitter resistors is a crime
of some kind.

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Stewart Pinkerton"
wrote in message
...
On 26 Mar 2006 17:16:29 -0800, "Andre Jute"
wrote:
Wilson, you're getting nuttier and nuttier. First you
claim my opinions and some really basic, totally
uncontroversial science are lies because I haven't
dotted thousands of tees you claim make your contrary
point. Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs,
which as far as I can tell are Blow Jobs by
Transvestites.

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern
BJT can be more linear *without feedback* than your
beloved DHTs. Surely a *true* 'ultrafidelista' would see
this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent' amplifier? Better
linearity and no humming heaters?

Erm. Stewart. DHTs don't have "heaters" :-((

Yup, according to Iain, and contrary to popular belief, DHT does not stand
for "Directly HEATED Triode".

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:51:17 GMT, Patrick Turner
wrote:

Andre remarked that ..........................

Now you want me to defend tubes against BJTs, which as far as I can
tell are Blow Jobs by Transvestites.

A truly DIMWITTED Trevor Wilson replied.....

Actually, the dimwit is clearly *you*, Turner.

**Nope. YOU claimed that triodes were the most linear amplification device.
Up until the development of modern transistors, that may have been the case.
It has not been the case for many years, however.

Unfortunately, Trevor has been spewing this drivel about BJTs being more linear
than triodes for years.

It's not drivel, it's basic fact which you are ignoring, in typical
tubie fashion.

They are only as linear as a triode with regard to voltage gain when external
loops of NFB have been applied,
as in the case of the emitter follower connection or having a few BJTs with a
loop of NFB around the
lot of them to correct all their mistakes.

Utter rubbish. Check out the spec sheet of the 2SA1216, particularly
when used in class A, and therefore with an elevated junction
temperature and a collector current of an amp or more. It is *way*
more linear than the 300B which is held in such reverence by you guys.

That's why I specified its NPN complement 2SC2922 for KISASS. The PNP
2SA1216 is marginally more linear, but most folks are happier with
positive rail voltages.

BJTs are inherently non linear for voltage gain and MUST rely on large amounts
of externally connected loops of NFB.

Utter rubbish, see above.

This applies regardless of whether you build a preamp with an opamp, a discrete
transistor preamp,
or any power amp.

Utter rubbish, see above.

Triodes don't, they have a small amount of NFB built into them.

I would ask Trevor to set up a simple 1 transistor preamp with a BC109, and
without any
NFB applied, not even an emitter current feedback resistor, and as a common
emitter voltage amplifier with a supply of 20V.

I would ask you to set up an EF86.

To understand his own utter stupidity, I ask Trevor to also set up a 6SN7 with a
250V supply to act as a preamp
and without any loop NFB, and he can then tell us all about the results which
will prove what a
jackarse he is.

The jackass is the one who has to specify a highly linear tube and a
pretty non-linear transistor to make his point. Try a 300B and a
2SC2922, and see what happens. Or of course you could put up the 6SN7
against any linear (as opposed to switching) high-voltage FET in
pretty much the same circuit, which is perhaps a fairer comparison.

If you were to want an *honest* comparison, you'd allow 10-15dB of
local degeneration in the SS circuit, to equate to the internal
feedback of the triode, but that's probably asking too much of a
tubie, especially as the result would be an even more crushing defeat
for the tube.

I insist Trevor compare the results of either device with respect for both
devices and
with respect to us, himself and truthful analysis, but I do believe I am doing
the equivalant of asking a pig to fly.

The result would not be in doubt - but you won't like it!

Until proven otherwise, It can safely be assumed that all of Trevor's knowledge
will fit upon a pinhead.

In the same analogy, one must assume that yours will fit comfortably
upon the point.

The only reason TW hangs out here is so he can display how seriously limited he
is.

I delete the rest of TW's bull****e without reading it.

Shame, you just *might* have learned something - but I doubt it.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:03:30 GMT, Patrick Turner
wrote:

Stewpid Oinkerton squealed....

Typical of tubies to use childish namecalling in lieu of any
substantive argument.

I notice you fail to address the fact that the modern BJT can be more
linear *without feedback* than your beloved DHTs. Surely a *true*
'ultrafidelista' would see this as the Holy Grail of the 'silent'
amplifier? Better linearity and no humming heaters?

The fact is that the modern transistor must rely on NFB for it to be
acceptable in any way.

The fact is that you have your facts wrong. Can you not *read* what is
plainly written above?

Every transistor amp must use a lot more NFB to be acceptable than the NFB
that is within
a tube such as a 6SN7.

Utter bull****, see my other post in this thread about the 2SA1216 and
2SC2922.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I cannot agree.

You have the right to be wrong - and you do love to exercise that
right!

I delete the rest of your silly post; you come here like the pork seller to
the synagogue to sell your pork,
and I ain't buying.

I know a couple of Jews who'd buy - but maybe not while in schul. :-)

Does it ever occur that you entirely waste your time and ours by trying to
hang out around here?

Not really, as some passing newbie might need a reality check, which
he sure isn't going to get from you or Jute!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering