"Ian Iveson" wrote

Columbus set off with a Chinese map of the world, including America in its
proper location, drawn up before the Chinese fleet was recalled because of
a long period of war. As with the UK, that fleet was made from pretty much
all the trees they had, which was a lot of trees.

So where does this little bit of bogus "history" come from?


The Chinese are generally well educated and just as clever as other
humans, so they aren't short of scientific and engineering knowledge.

Exactly.

Economically, it seems probable that the plants had become "cash cows"
before they went to China, and have remained so since.

Indeed, would valve quality have been any better had the production
equipment stayed in Europe or the US? Both continents make some pretty
shoddy products as well as some superb ones.

David.

Phil Allison wrote:
"Ian Bell= ****ing RATBAG MORON"
Phil Allison wrote:
"Brian Gaff"
I think one has to be careful if buying the Chinese copies of valves
around at the current time, as quality control is almost non existent,
though some Russian ones are made a lot better I'm told.


** Why refer to them as " Chinese copies of valves " ??

My info is that the Chinese purchased valve making equipment ( including
dies and materials) from Europe when factories there closed in the 1980s
and transported it to China.

This is so they could easily start making popular audio valves like
EL34s, 6L6s and 12AX7s - for which there were no equivalent Chinese
types in production at the time.


That assumes that all that is required to make good tubes is the
equipment.


** There is no such assumption within or behind my post

- you ****ing ASININE TENTH WIT !!!



..... Phil




And a Merry Christmas and a Healthy New Year to you too Phil

Cheers

Ian

On Dec 16, 1:05*am, "Phil Allison" wrote:
"David Loser"
"Ian Bell ****ing RATBAG "



That assumes that all that is required to make good tubes is the
equipment. Whether or not the Chinese have the necessary know how as well
is moot.

I'm sure

** * LOL * - Loser is never sure if his ARSE e is on fire or nor !!

that the nation that invented printing, gunpowder and bone china (amongst
many other things) won't have much problem in acquiring the necessary
know-how.

** Shame all the EVIDENCE *of the last 20+ years says the exact opposite -
ie Chinese audio valves are still of relatively* poor quality and with very
poor quality control as well.

Virtually all of them come from just one Chinese maker, " Shuguang Electron
Group Co Ltd."

http://www.shuguangelec.com/en/profile.asp

( * relatively *= *relative to the US, UK and major European brands before
they ceased operations )

..... * Phil

The Chinese had a huge headstart in all that knowledge, and having the
machinery; they should have enjoyed all of what is known in economics
as "the advantages of backwardness". If the Chinese were interested in
making good tubes, it would have happened by now. I think we can
assume they're interested in volume well before quantity. No amount of
creepy leftwing excuses can change the outcome: after 20+ years,
Chinese tube quality is *very* patchy.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at
http://www.audio-talk.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio
constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of
wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

"Andre Jute" wrote

The Chinese had a huge headstart in all that knowledge, and having the
machinery; they should have enjoyed all of what is known in economics
as "the advantages of backwardness". If the Chinese were interested in
making good tubes, it would have happened by now. I think we can
assume they're interested in volume well before quantity. No amount of
creepy leftwing excuses can change the outcome: after 20+ years,
Chinese tube quality is *very* patchy.


Which is all beside the point. The Chinese have the know-how, whether they
choose to use it is another matter entirely. If they all come from the same
maker then there is no competitive pressure to improve quality. That's the
way capitalism works, nothing to do with "leftwing excuses".

David.

David Looser wrote:

Columbus set off with a Chinese map of the world,
including America in its proper location, drawn up before
the Chinese fleet was recalled because of a long period
of war. As with the UK, that fleet was made from pretty
much all the trees they had, which was a lot of trees.

So where does this little bit of bogus "history" come
from?

Since you've already decided it's bogus, why do you want to
know?

I'd be quite interested to know *why* you think it's bogus,
in particular? Pretty much all of history regularly turns
out to be bogus, more or less, in one way or another. The
Chinese were remarkably absent from my school history,
except for some passing mention of Marco Polo, who made
stuff up.

Actually, as with much of my view of history, I can't
remember where the Chinese world map story came from.
Possibly a TV documentary. Of course the details are open to
doubt, but the generality...that Chinese maps of the world
were available before European ones...seems to be generally
accepted. I judge it unlikely that such a huge trading fleet
could have managed to keep its maps secret from the
Europeans.

http://www.chengho.org/news/chinesemap.php

Is what a casual Google came up with. I wonder what's
happened since then?

Makes a nice story anyway. The island of California is an
interesting error. I can see how it might have been made by
explorers arriving from the Pacific, but not by those
arriving by land or along the coast, and yet it appears on
European maps.

The Chinese are generally well educated and just as
clever as other humans, so they aren't short of
scientific and engineering knowledge.

Exactly.

Economically, it seems probable that the plants had
become "cash cows" before they went to China, and have
remained so since.

Indeed, would valve quality have been any better had the
production equipment stayed in Europe or the US? Both
continents make some pretty shoddy products as well as
some superb ones.

Agreed. Of course.

Ian

"Ian Iveson" wrote in message
...
David Looser wrote:

Columbus set off with a Chinese map of the world, including America in
its proper location, drawn up before the Chinese fleet was recalled
because of a long period of war. As with the UK, that fleet was made
from pretty much all the trees they had, which was a lot of trees.

So where does this little bit of bogus "history" come from?

Since you've already decided it's bogus, why do you want to know?

I'd be quite interested to know *why* you think it's bogus, in particular?

OK, "bogus" was too strong. The map is interesting I agree, and I'm
certainly not calling *it* "bogus, though as yet it's authenticity is
unproven. But who says that Columbus had a copy? Of course we now know that
the Vikings briefly colonised North America in the 14th C, though it's very
unlikely that Columbus would have known about that.

I suppose the phrase that really triggered my use of "bogus" was "As with
the UK, that fleet was made from pretty much all the trees they had, which
was a lot of trees". Do you *really* believe that the British fleet, let
alone the Chinese one, represented "pretty much all the trees they had"?

It's well accepted that the Chinese were at one time a major sea-faring and
trading nation and had excellent ship building skills. Later for reasons
that remain obscure they gave up sea-borne trade and turned inward. The
phrase "the Chinese fleet was recalled because of a long period of war"
doesn't line up with anything I've ever read. I've seen it argued that one
reason that the Chinese-built Mongol fleet for the invasion of Japan was
lost so dramatically in a storm (the original Kamikaze, which means "Divine
Wind") was that the Chinese ship builders, who were working under
sufferance, deliberately constructed the ships to be unseaworthy.

David.

David Looser wrote:

Columbus set off with a Chinese map of the world,
including America in its proper location, drawn up
before the Chinese fleet was recalled because of a long
period of war. As with the UK, that fleet was made from
pretty much all the trees they had, which was a lot of
trees.

So where does this little bit of bogus "history" come
from?

Since you've already decided it's bogus, why do you want
to know?

I'd be quite interested to know *why* you think it's
bogus, in particular?

OK, "bogus" was too strong. The map is interesting I
agree, and I'm certainly not calling *it* "bogus, though
as yet it's authenticity is unproven. But who says that
Columbus had a copy? Of course we now know that the
Vikings briefly colonised North America in the 14th C,
though it's very unlikely that Columbus would have known
about that.

But nonetheless likely that he had a copy of the Chinese
one. The story went that it was presented to the King of
Spain as some kind of gift or tribute. If the Chinese had
ceased trading, then they would have nothing to lose.

I suppose the phrase that really triggered my use of
"bogus" was "As with the UK, that fleet was made from
pretty much all the trees they had, which was a lot of
trees". Do you *really* believe that the British fleet,
let alone the Chinese one, represented "pretty much all
the trees they had"?

An overstatement big enough to be obvious hyperbole, I
thought. I do think it true that shipbuilding, here and in
China, became increasingly constrained by a shortage of
suitable remaining trees. I guess that only certain kinds
and sizes of tree were suitable though. Their ships were
much bigger, and there were lots of them, so it seems
reasonable to assume that they used proportionately more
trees. Others were used for houses or fuel. Wherever all
that story came from, I suppose I assimilated it because it
fitted with whatever I thought I already knew.

So, as a matter of interest, how many trees are needed to
make a ship, and how many ships were made? How many trees
are there in a square mile of forest?

And where *did* all the trees go?

Wasn't there a long period of civil and local wars around
what is now China? Perhaps involving Korea and other
emerging border states, and areas which are now China but
weren't at the time?

It's well accepted that the Chinese were at one time a
major sea-faring and trading nation and had excellent ship
building skills. Later for reasons that remain obscure
they gave up sea-borne trade and turned inward. The phrase
"the Chinese fleet was recalled because of a long period
of war" doesn't line up with anything I've ever read. I've
seen it argued that one reason that the Chinese-built
Mongol fleet for the invasion of Japan was lost so
dramatically in a storm (the original Kamikaze, which
means "Divine Wind") was that the Chinese ship builders,
who were working under sufferance, deliberately
constructed the ships to be unseaworthy.

Neither sounds likely as an explanation for why so many
ships seemed to disappear from history. For some reason they
stopped trading all over the world. War at home seems a more
likely cause. Ships don't seem to last long at the best of
times, and once the wars were over they couldn't build more
because they ran out of suitable trees and the age of big
wooden ships was over.

Ian

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Ian Bell" wrote

That assumes that all that is required to make good tubes is the
equipment. Whether or not the Chinese have the necessary know how as well
is moot.


I'm sure that the nation that invented printing, gunpowder and bone china
(amongst many other things) won't have much problem in acquiring the
necessary know-how.

**I keep a large box, full of Chinese valves, I purchased to service
equipment. They're all buggered and they're all new or very close to new. I
keep them to remind myself NEVER to buy Chinese valves (unless there is
simply no alternative). Russian valves, by comparison, are generally much,
much better. NOS American, German, Australian and British are better still.

Ah, I remember paying AUS$25.00 each for GE-MOV KT88s. Good times. Great
valves. One of my instructors was on the team that developed the KT88.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Trevor Wilson"

**I keep a large box, full of Chinese valves, I purchased to service
equipment. They're all buggered and they're all new or very close to new.
I keep them to remind myself NEVER to buy Chinese valves (unless there is
simply no alternative).

** So you have not bought any Chinese made valves in a long time.

Russian valves, by comparison, are generally much, much better.


** Found that to be true of the power types (ie EL34, EL84, 6L6 & 6550s )
but not so very much in the case of 'X7s and 'T7s.


NOS American, German, Australian and British are better still.


** How many of these have you bought lately?

The last time I saw any US made Philips/Sylvania 6L6GCs or 6550As
advertised, they were asking well over $100 each and the sky is the limit
for genuine Mullard EL34s.

Collectors items only - not parts for use in real amps any more.


Ah, I remember paying AUS$25.00 each for GE-MOV KT88s.


** That would have to be about 40 years ago.

******.


..... Phil

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:18:39 +0000, Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"Ian Bell" wrote

I had some of those too. There were also green spot rf ones. I still
have a red spot one. Must be worth a fortune now ;-)


If they are worth a fortune I'm sitting on a gold-mine here!

I think I have some old 'Newmarket' (if that was the name) transistors.
Maybe if these kinds of things are now 'historic relics' I should dig
some of them out... :-) IIRC they are still in the corrugated
cardboard in the boxes in which they were bought.



Would those be the ones in the flat cans with yellow & green spots for
audio and a red spot for RF, Jim?

Interesting page for flat cans:
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~wylie/NKT/newmarket.htm

Another for "top hat" cans:
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~wyli...an/Ediswan.htm

--
Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!)
Web: http://www.nascom.info
Filtering everything posted from googlegroups to kill spam.