AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
The interest in the Sugden amps mystifies me because they seem to be
so backward.


** A quirky, pommy amp only a quirky pommy could love.

I'd suggest you actually listen to one - especially into a pair of ELS
57s.
It sounds a deal cleaner than a 303 - although obviously slightly down on
power.

Agreed. They are still highly sought after.

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Iain Cherchus Utter ****ing IDIOT "


Agreed.


** Kiss of death whenever this genetic retard agrees.






........ Phil

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
As it happens I've done just this test which is why I brought it up.
And thought it might be of interest even to you - thinking you may
have changed your attitude to attempts at sensible discussion. So back
in the killfile you go.

Which amp did you try?

All from a failing ;-) memory as it was a long time ago.

A pal was a great ELS fan - but wasn't happy with the 303 as a replacement
for his Quad II amps. And experimented with what I think was a borrowed
A21. And liked the sound. Actually bought the later 25 watt one (A42?)
which he stuck with for a long long time - despite trying the 405 etc.
And demonstrated the various combinations with which I agreed with on his
conclusions.


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled with
the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)

Iain

LYING PITA SCUMBAG
 

"Iain Cherchus ****ing IDIOT "


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled with
the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)



** The Cherchus LYING PITA SCUMBAG

never gets sick of posting this ridiculous fabrication.

There are LIES, DAMN LIES and then there is the ****ING ****

that Iain Churches vomits out all over the place.


Killfile the vile cretin NOW !!!!!!!!!




....... Phil

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

In article , Iain
Churches wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Jim Lesurf
wrote:
As it happens I've done just this test which is why I brought it
up. And thought it might be of interest even to you - thinking you
may have changed your attitude to attempts at sensible discussion.
So back in the killfile you go.

Which amp did you try?

All from a failing ;-) memory as it was a long time ago.

A pal was a great ELS fan - but wasn't happy with the 303 as a
replacement for his Quad II amps. And experimented with what I think
was a borrowed A21. And liked the sound. Actually bought the later 25
watt one (A42?) which he stuck with for a long long time - despite
trying the 405 etc. And demonstrated the various combinations with
which I agreed with on his conclusions.


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled
with the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)

I've not tried the A21 in any version, nor can I recall anyone claiming
that, "All amplifiers sound the same". Just that some/many may be
indistiguishable in appropriate use. :-) But in this case the differences
in the output impedances of the two amps might perhaps produce different
frequency responses with a load like the 57.

Slainte,

Jim

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

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

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


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled
with the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)

I've not tried the A21 in any version, nor can I recall anyone
claiming
that, "All amplifiers sound the same".


You either have a poor or a very selective memory, Jimbo - or you
perhaps were wise enough not to read all the posts from a former
subscriber here (the Roseate One) who frequently made the claim (as he
slid further into what appeared to be an AV/can't be arsed with 'audio'
vegetative state) that all amplifiers did more or less sound the same
with the preconditions that they were 'good', solid state and cost 300
UKP or more.


Just that some/many may be
indistiguishable in appropriate use. :-)


That's a different thing entirely - my view was always that the 'all
good amps sound the same' claim always depended on the other kit with
which they were/are being used. Interesting though, that the maggies
seem to lack no evidence to support their views that 'this amp' sounds
like this and 'that amp' sounds different on different material &c. ??


But in this case the differences
in the output impedances of the two amps might perhaps produce
different
frequency responses with a load like the 57.


There ya go for starters...

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
A pal was a great ELS fan - but wasn't happy with the 303 as a
replacement for his Quad II amps. And experimented with what I think
was a borrowed A21. And liked the sound. Actually bought the later 25
watt one (A42?) which he stuck with for a long long time - despite
trying the 405 etc. And demonstrated the various combinations with
which I agreed with on his conclusions.


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled
with the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)

No point in asking me that one, Iain. I can think of plenty amps that
don't sound 'the same'. Especially SET ones - hence their attraction to
those who aren't interested in an accurate sound but want something
'better'.

I also didn't agree with Allison's comment about the 303 never needing
adjustment.

--
*TEAMWORK...means never having to take all the blame yourself *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
A pal was a great ELS fan - but wasn't happy with the 303 as a
replacement for his Quad II amps. And experimented with what I
think
was a borrowed A21. And liked the sound. Actually bought the later
25
watt one (A42?) which he stuck with for a long long time - despite
trying the 405 etc. And demonstrated the various combinations with
which I agreed with on his conclusions.


Interesting observations. Thanks Dave. But how can that be reconciled
with the all amplifiers sound the same argument? :-)

No point in asking me that one, Iain. I can think of plenty amps that
don't sound 'the same'. Especially SET ones - hence their attraction
to
those who aren't interested in an accurate sound but want something
'better'.


Make that 'those who want greater *realism* and *listenability* over
accurate but blando-boring' and I'll sign that chitty...

(I listen to music to be *moved* - not just bloody *informed*....)

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Dave Plowman (News)"


I also didn't agree with Allison's comment about the 303 never needing
adjustment.


** You just make up any stupid, damn LIE you like and post it as fact.

What a VILE audiophool cretin you are.




........ Phil

AudioMisc pages on early J. E. Sugden Class A amps
 

"Jim Lesurf"


I've not tried the A21 in any version, nor can I recall anyone claiming
that, "All amplifiers sound the same". Just that some/many may be
indistiguishable in appropriate use. :-) But in this case the differences
in the output impedances of the two amps might perhaps produce different
frequency responses with a load like the 57.


** The schem on your pages for the A21 shows the negative feedback being
taken from the speaker output - ie after the DC blocking cap.

However, the A21 " series 2" schem shows the take off point as being
shifted to the other side of that cap.

Makes a big difference, particularly if the load is the input tranny of an
ESL 57.

What not try modelling it ?




........ Phil