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

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a message
that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

No, it was clearly stated on more than one occasion that 'all ss
amplifiers sound the same' by the poster (obliquely) referred to
above.

If it happened so many times, then it should be easy to come up with a
quote from google.

I just did a search, and even after going back 10 years, I find no such
claims except as debating topics as opposed to actual claims.

When I queried this, I was told 'all *good* ss amplifiers sound the
same'. When I further queried what constituted a 'good' amplifier, I
was told 'anything 300 quid or over' - or words very much to that
effect.

Prove it.

No, you prove it - start he

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....10&sa=N&hl=en&

Been there, done that. Things are as I said, above.

You know Keith, you're one arrogant POS if you think that you're the only
person around here who can come up with relevant retrievals from Google.



Not half as arrogant as you, if you think that just because I lead you to
something by the nose that I consider *anybody* else here needs leading
similarly....

Sorry Keith, but that ponderous run-on is just too convoluted for my
limited mind to extract a unique sensible meaning from.

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

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"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.

Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a message that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

But I can't recall anyone making such a statement with no qualifiers. If
you can, perhaps you can post the details of who, when, etc. - i.e. give
the date, time, title, etc, of the posting, and the full wording.

My recollection is that a more common claim was something like "all
qualifiers amplifiers sound the same (or indistinguishable) under
specified conditions of use.". Many people have said, this, from PJW
onwards. Alas, it then seems to be routinely changed to remove all
the specifics/qualifiers by someone else who dislikes what was said
and who wants to argue.

I think this is the a version of the 'Straw Man' debate technique. :-)


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...

Indeed. A point that has been made countless times in the past. And so far
as I recall, not contested by anyone who made the qualified claim I give
above. Since I can't recall anyone making the unqualified claim, I can't
say if they'd have objected to what I wrote. But if you can give specifics
I can check. :-)


Jim. Could your lapse of memory be a parallel of your not remembering
the very same poster claiming that all vinyl rolled of at 12kHz?
I was amazed that you said nothing.

But in the great scheme of things it is not important. Only
horticulture is important, and even that is not very important:-)

Regards to all
Iain

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

In article , Rob
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:


Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a message that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

But I can't recall anyone making such a statement with no qualifiers.
If you can, perhaps you can post the details of who, when, etc. - i.e.
give the date, time, title, etc, of the posting, and the full wording.


I'm afraid I must shoulder some of the blame. It's my contention that
they don't sound the same - far from it.

A couple of people had the patience to explain that most SS amplifiers
built nowadays simply do sound the same to all intents and purposes
given:

* a reasonable set of operating parameters, principally relating to
speakers; * a certain specification, which most off the shelf integrated
amplifiers meet.

I am not sure what 'blame' you are taking onto yourself. What you write
above is consistent with what I was saying. i.e. That you may have
initially thought someone was claiming that "All amplifiers sound the
same", but it was then pointed out that the statements were qualified along
the lines I have indicated.

Serge (and you) guided me through the whole thing, but I became lost at
a crucial point of measurement (you measure the electrical
specification, I wanted to measure the sound; you said they were the
same thing;

I've not checked, but I am not sure I would have said that they were the
"same thing".

I may have pointed out that the amplifier deals with input and output
voltage (and current) patterns. i.e. electronic signal patterns. Not sound.

From which it follows that if two amplifier give the same electrical output
from the same input, then they should be indistinguishable in terms of what
emerges from the speakers.

(An exception being if one amp nechanically 'buzzes' or 'hums' so giving
an audible unwanted sound.)


IIRC One of the points being discussed was that you can use the electrical
signal levels at the loudspeaker inputs to check that the two amps are
being used to give similar sound volume levels with a given speaker.

You need to do this when trying to compare because if one system plays a
bit louder than the other, then they may sound 'different' for that reason
even when the amps are otherwise identical. Much easer to check the levels
are the same at the loudspeaker input than by trying to measure the sound
pressure level in the room.

Of course, if you keep changing the speaker, or its location, then this
will cause the results to change regardless of choice of amplifier.
Ditto for listening position in the room, etc. This illstrates one of the
various problems that afflict those who try to judge by sound in an
uncontrolled comparison. There are simply too many factors that can
affect that results which have nothing to do with the amplifier.


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
 

"Rob" wrote in message
...
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"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.

Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a message that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

But I can't recall anyone making such a statement with no qualifiers. If
you can, perhaps you can post the details of who, when, etc. - i.e. give
the date, time, title, etc, of the posting, and the full wording.


I'm afraid I must shoulder some of the blame. It's my contention that they
don't sound the same - far from it.

A couple of people had the patience to explain that most SS amplifiers
built nowadays simply do sound the same to all intents and purposes given:

* a reasonable set of operating parameters, principally relating to
speakers;
* a certain specification, which most off the shelf integrated amplifiers
meet.

Serge (and you) guided me through the whole thing, but I became lost at a
crucial point of measurement (you measure the electrical specification, I
wanted to measure the sound; you said they were the same thing; I said
they might not), and left it at that. I can't get to grips with google's
newsgroup search, but here's a bit of the thread, from Serge's
contribution:

"Price of the amplifier isn't important. It is well recognised, at least
amongst audio professionals, that the ear's ability to hear differences
has
a lower threshold. If an amplifier's performance is below that threshold,
then all differences between such amplifiers is not audible."

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....99490883d4a4f8

It's a timely reminder that whatever the measured differencs between
equipment, if even the worse of them measures below the threshold of hearing
for that particular parameter (e.g. THD 0.1%, frequency response +- 0.5dB
20-20kHz, 1kHz level matching to 0.5dB etc etc) then no matter how much
better one device is over another, they will both sound the same.

Two amplifiers with no qualification could well sound different into any
particular loudspeaker load, but if then you carry out the measurements,
there is always a measureable reason for the difference. As has been
previously suggested, the Sugden's higher output impedance could well result
in an altered frequency response into an ESL load compared with the 303.
It's that altered frequency response that's audible, not any intrinsic
difference between amplifiers.

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

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

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a
message that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

No, it was clearly stated on more than one occasion that 'all ss
amplifiers sound the same' by the poster (obliquely) referred to
above.

If it happened so many times, then it should be easy to come up
with a quote from google.

I just did a search, and even after going back 10 years, I find no
such claims except as debating topics as opposed to actual claims.

When I queried this, I was told 'all *good* ss amplifiers sound
the same'. When I further queried what constituted a 'good'
amplifier, I was told 'anything 300 quid or over' - or words very
much to that effect.

Prove it.

No, you prove it - start he

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....10&sa=N&hl=en&

Been there, done that. Things are as I said, above.

You know Keith, you're one arrogant POS if you think that you're the
only person around here who can come up with relevant retrievals
from Google.



Not half as arrogant as you, if you think that just because I lead
you to something by the nose that I consider *anybody* else here
needs leading similarly....

Sorry Keith, but that ponderous run-on is just too convoluted for my
limited mind to extract a unique sensible meaning from.


No need to apologise, if you need it simplified just say so - try this:

It is even more arrogant of you to presume that just because I give
*you* a link I would need to for anyone else...

Does that help?

:-)

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

In article i, Iain
Churches wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Well, perhaps it was sometimes claimed by one poster in a message that
*someone else* had said "All amplifiers sound the same".

But I can't recall anyone making such a statement with no qualifiers.
If you can, perhaps you can post the details of who, when, etc. - i.e.
give the date, time, title, etc, of the posting, and the full wording.


Indeed. A point that has been made countless times in the past. And so
far as I recall, not contested by anyone who made the qualified claim
I give above. Since I can't recall anyone making the unqualified
claim, I can't say if they'd have objected to what I wrote. But if you
can give specifics I can check. :-)


Jim. Could your lapse of memory be a parallel of your not remembering
the very same poster claiming that all vinyl rolled of at 12kHz? I was
amazed that you said nothing.

Maybe. Afraid I can't recall that, either. I am aware that the max possible
level tends to fall at HF, but the details will depend on how the disc was
cut and is replayed.

That said, I am currently getting some interesting results from analysing
the details of the modulation patterns on some LPs.

But in the great scheme of things it is not important. Only
horticulture is important, and even that is not very important:-)

At present I am mainly trying to keep up with basics like watering,
weeding, etc. Not been any decent rain here for some time.

However the good news is that I am in the process of getting a large batch
of 1950s and 1960s HFN mags. These should put a dent in the time I have for
gardening once they arrive! Thousands of pages of new reference info. ;-

BTW Judging by the webstats, the Sugden pages are proving very popular.
This encourages me to add more info when I can.

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
 

In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:



As has been previously suggested, the Sugden's higher output impedance
could well result in an altered frequency response into an ESL load
compared with the 303. It's that altered frequency response that's
audible, not any intrinsic difference between amplifiers.

I don't think it is quite a simple as the old A21 having a higher output
impedance.

The complications are that the A21 has a different size output cap, and no
output series inductor. Also note where the A21 (original) has the feedback
from the *output* side of the coupling capacitor. As with the old Armstrong
600 amp, taking the feedback from that side has a significant effect on the
output impedance at low frequency, as well as on the LF distortion to some
extent. (The 600 could actually have a *negative* output impedance in an LF
band due to this and its dual feedback arrangement. Although this varied in
production as I altered some of the component values, etc.)

FWIW I'd expect the A21 to tend to have a *lower* output impedance at LF
and HF than the 303 - although this depends on the open loop gain to some
extent so I can't be sure. I don't have sufficiently detailed info on the
A21 as yet, but hope to soon. :-)

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