What they are confusing this with is their preference for an
intentionally flawed but
entirely pleasnt and relatively benign form of distortion. Nothing
wrong with their
listening preference but the presentation of this as inherently
superior is utterly
bogus.

The idea that valves are simply "added distortion" and nothing else
could only be made by somebody with a) very little knowledge of modern
valve circuits and how they sound or b) somebody with cloth ears.

Andy Evans wrote:

You've snipped all the previous content so it's impossible to know what exactly
you're replying to.

Please use 'inline posting'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_...nline_replying

You currently have all the hallmark signs of an arrogant opinionated
self-obsessed jerk !

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Andy Evans wrote:

You've snipped all the previous content so it's impossible to know what
exactly
you're replying to.

Please use 'inline posting'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_...nline_replying

You currently have all the hallmark signs of an arrogant opinionated
self-obsessed jerk !


And you don't....??

Keith G wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...

Andy Evans wrote:

You've snipped all the previous content so it's impossible to know what
exactly you're replying to.

Please use 'inline posting'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_...nline_replying

You currently have all the hallmark signs of an arrogant opinionated
self-obsessed jerk !

And you don't....??

You're suggesting that it's arrogant to use and encourage the use of established
Usenet norms ?

They exist for a reason as you'll see when you read another of my posts. Evans's
method of attribution led you to incorrectly attribute part of what I said to
him.

Graham

Andy Evans wrote:

What they are confusing this with is their preference for an
intentionally flawed but
entirely pleasnt and relatively benign form of distortion. Nothing
wrong with their
listening preference but the presentation of this as inherently
superior is utterly
bogus.

The idea that valves are simply "added distortion" and nothing else
could only be made by somebody with a) very little knowledge of modern
valve circuits and how they sound or b) somebody with cloth ears.

There is precious litle 'modern' about any valve circuit. I learnt on them btw.

For someone with cloth ears I must have been doing well to examine some problems
audibly in the noise floor here on Thursday .....
http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_mark_knopfler/
http://www.recordproduction.com/mpg-event-june05.html
http://mixonline.com/news/headline/p...opfler-060106/

Graham

There is precious litle 'modern' about any valve circuit. I learnt on
them btw.

I've no doubt you know valves from ( ?50s, 60s?, 70s?), but you'd be
very surprised at how much things have changed. Not the function of the
triode itself, which is well known, but the support circuitry is now
quite complex - cascode active loads, constant current sinks etc. - a
whole cuisine of modern ss devices and traditional stuff like glow
tubes. It really is "nouvelle cuisine" if you pardon the expression.
We're not talking Mullard circuits with EF86s and ECC83s any more.

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
There is precious litle 'modern' about any valve circuit. I learnt on
them btw.

I've no doubt you know valves from ( ?50s, 60s?, 70s?), but you'd be
very surprised at how much things have changed. Not the function of the
triode itself, which is well known, but the support circuitry is now
quite complex - cascode active loads, constant current sinks etc. - a
whole cuisine of modern ss devices and traditional stuff like glow
tubes. It really is "nouvelle cuisine" if you pardon the expression.
We're not talking Mullard circuits with EF86s and ECC83s any more.



You've got more faith with some of these 'hot under the collar' types than I
have Andy - I take a lot of what they say with a pinch of salt (large one).
Most of 'em have never heard a valve amp and some of the others have only
heard some old *legacy* struggler at best and seem to forget what some of
the transistor equipment from the 70s could sound like.....

Keith G wrote:

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
There is precious litle 'modern' about any valve circuit. I learnt on
them btw.

I've no doubt you know valves from ( ?50s, 60s?, 70s?), but you'd be
very surprised at how much things have changed. Not the function of the
triode itself, which is well known, but the support circuitry is now
quite complex - cascode active loads, constant current sinks etc. - a
whole cuisine of modern ss devices and traditional stuff like glow
tubes. It really is "nouvelle cuisine" if you pardon the expression.
We're not talking Mullard circuits with EF86s and ECC83s any more.

You've got more faith with some of these 'hot under the collar' types than I
have Andy - I take a lot of what they say with a pinch of salt (large one).
Most of 'em have never heard a valve amp and some of the others have only
heard some old *legacy* struggler at best and seem to forget what some of
the transistor equipment from the 70s could sound like.....

Why would I consider the performance of 70s transistor equipment as having any
more weight than legacy tube kit ?

Graham

"Keith G" wrote in message


You've got more faith with some of these 'hot under the
collar' types than I have Andy - I take a lot of what
they say with a pinch of salt (large one). Most of 'em
have never heard a valve amp and some of the others have
only heard some old *legacy* struggler at best and seem
to forget what some of the transistor equipment from the
70s could sound like.....

And some of us jsut lately spent three days at a well-known high end audio
show, listening to bunches and bunches of this crap. Did I say that it was
crap?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message


You've got more faith with some of these 'hot under the
collar' types than I have Andy - I take a lot of what
they say with a pinch of salt (large one). Most of 'em
have never heard a valve amp and some of the others have
only heard some old *legacy* struggler at best and seem
to forget what some of the transistor equipment from the
70s could sound like.....

And some of us jsut lately spent three days at a well-known high end audio
show, listening to bunches and bunches of this crap. Did I say that it was
crap?



What crap - legacy valve amps or 70s transistor equipment?

Or are you saying there were a *lot* of new valve amps there? If there were
it would tell us something - your not liking them means nothing to me,
almost certainly nothing to the manufacturers or even the rest of the world
probably....?? ;-)