"MZ" wrote in message
...
To show the design idea, and the design idea is shared with A/B amps.

In terms of crossover distortion (the point that YOU brought up), no, they
don't share design ideas. In fact, class A/B was devised specifically to
set the two classes apart.

No, A/B reduces crossover distortion.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Oh my. Another one. Keep playing with our oscilloscope, you're
learning a
lot.

Which part of my post do you disagree with?

Why would you assume I disagreed with anything you said?

Because you responded to it with a snide comment.

Yeah, but there could have been any number of reasons for that. I completely
agree that you don't know anything about tube amps in cars.

I suspect this is yet another one of your posts where you reply just to
take the focus off of your ignorance.

Now you're getting warm! The point of the post was to point out your
ignorance on the issue of tube amps in cars. You're a hoot!

I'm also ignorant of purple unicorns. Like tube amps in cars, they don't
exist.

Moron.

To show the design idea, and the design idea is shared with A/B amps.

In terms of crossover distortion (the point that YOU brought up), no, they
don't share design ideas. In fact, class A/B was devised specifically to
set the two classes apart.

No, A/B reduces crossover distortion.

That's what I said. Learn to read. The entire point of class A/B is to
eliminate crossover distortion. Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown. So, no, they don't share design ideas in regards to crossover
distortion. One design is willing to accept it; the other is designed
specifically to eliminate it.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
To show the design idea, and the design idea is shared with A/B amps.

In terms of crossover distortion (the point that YOU brought up), no, they
don't share design ideas. In fact, class A/B was devised specifically to
set the two classes apart.

No, A/B reduces crossover distortion.

That's what I said. Learn to read. The entire point of class A/B is to
eliminate crossover distortion. Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown. So, no, they don't share design ideas in regards to crossover
distortion. One design is willing to accept it; the other is designed
specifically to eliminate it.

What a total load of crap, and backpedaling. A/B was not designed to eliminate
crossover distortion. What a load of horse****. Class A amplifiers already did
that. The output devices conduct all the time. Class B was designed to be more
efficient. Class A/B was designed to compromise, not to eliminate crossover
distortion. The design that eliminates crossover distortion already existed!
So yes, by their very design (not conducting all the time), class A/B amplifiers
share the same problem with class B amplifiers, just to a lesser extent.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
Don't mess in Les's playground or he'll get mad! If he says you can't talk
about tube amps, you can't! Of course, you could use a tube car amp, but
don't confuse him with facts like that. This is rec.AUDIO.car.

Tube car amp? Is that anything like your class B car amp?

By the way, you nicely dodged the issue of class D amps that was mentioned. I
supposed you'll deny the existence of those too, and claim they sound literally
perfect, just like all the other amps in the world.

jeffc wrote:

you 2 cyborgs make fools out of
yourselves.

jeffc wrote:


Moron.

jeffc wrote:

"What a total load of crap

I have a pair of nice dynamotors if anyone needs high voltage for their
output stage!
"MZ" wrote in message
news
Tube car amp? Is that anything like your class B car amp?

No. What's your point other than getting excited about your post show
up on
Usenet?

My point is that such an animal doesn't exist. You felt the need to
introduce crossover distortion into the conversation, even though class B
designs aren't available in the car. Now it appears you'll be going the
same route with the tube amp argument, since you hassled Les about
excluding them from the conversation.

Scott, well I assume this is Scott and not Barb.

I take it you have tube amps in your car?

How reliable have they been, and what kind of roads/driving conditions do
they see?

How effecient are they?

From your first post I assume to you the tube amps sound better, but is the
quality difference noticeable going down the road?

BTW, I am not trying to argue with you I have just never talked with anyone
that has had all tube amps in their car.

Les

"scott and barb" . wrote in message
link.net...
Sounds like you need one of them there single-endeds..Seriously, though
find
an old 6bq5 amp push-pull approx 12 watts per channel with decent output
transformers on those Klipschorns.....Typically great midrange.....
"Trader" wrote in message
t...
Well I agree with everything you wrote. However, there are many here
who
believe that amps all sound the same. This doesn't make sense because
how
could an amp with a superior circuit design and premium parts sound the
same
as a RadioShack special. I've personally have auditioned many amps on
my
Klipschorns and can testify that all amps don't sound the same. I don't
buy
into the theory that distortion is what I'm hearing because even at
moderate
levels I can hear a substantial difference. I'm sure that some speakers
are
not revealing enough to hear much of a difference but with Klipschorns
you
hear everything that is present. My Father in-law is an engineer and he
has
a cheap Bose system and it sounds like ****. He laughed when I bought a
tube amp for my Klipschorns and thought that it couldn't possibly sound
good. Well it sounded amazing although I still prefer my SS amp. But
yeah
believe what you want and buy the low-end gear if it makes you happy.


"jeffc" wrote in message
...

"jeffc" wrote in message
...
Like I said to begin with, believe it or not, weight is a pretty
decent
indicator of quality (including power output and headroom.) Of
course,
we're
not talking about tube amps here.

Having said that, check out this. Again, search on "weight"
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/875/
Heh heh.

"Les" wrote in message
...
?

BTW, I am not trying to argue with you...

That'll start after you tell him it "sounds good".

What a total load of crap, and backpedaling. A/B was not designed to eliminate
crossover distortion. What a load of horse****. Class A amplifiers already did
that. The output devices conduct all the time. Class B was designed to be more
efficient. Class A/B was designed to compromise, not to eliminate crossover
distortion.

There's no compromise necessary, when class A/B eliminates crossover
distortion while being much more efficient in the process. According to
Merriam-Webster, compromise means "a settlement of differences by
arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions." As much as your
stereo review magazines would like to claim, there is no mutual
concession. Class A does not offer anything that class A/B does not.

As I said already, yet you felt the need to argue with anyway, class A/B
offers all the benefits of class B, but eliminates crossover distortion in
the process.

By the way, you nicely dodged the issue of class D amps that was mentioned. I
supposed you'll deny the existence of those too, and claim they sound literally
perfect, just like all the other amps in the world.

That's because they do. Find me one class D amp that exhibits an audible
level of distortion prior to the onset of clipping (like that terminology
better? I put it that way to avoid a 15-post discussion on the merits of
using the term popular in the field) and within the frequency band
recommended by the manufacturer.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
What a total load of crap, and backpedaling. A/B was not designed to
eliminate
crossover distortion. What a load of horse****. Class A amplifiers
already did
that. The output devices conduct all the time. Class B was designed to
be more
efficient. Class A/B was designed to compromise, not to eliminate
crossover
distortion.

There's no compromise necessary, when class A/B eliminates crossover
distortion while being much more efficient in the process.

No, it doesn't.

Class A does not offer anything that class A/B does not.

Yes, it does.

As I said already, yet you felt the need to argue with anyway, class A/B
offers all the benefits of class B, but eliminates crossover distortion in
the process.

No, it doesn't. Read the Conclusions section.
http://www.aikenamps.com/CrossoverDistortion.htm

"MZ" wrote in message
news
By the way, you nicely dodged the issue of class D amps that was
mentioned. I
supposed you'll deny the existence of those too, and claim they sound
literally
perfect, just like all the other amps in the world.

That's because they do. Find me one class D amp that exhibits an audible
level of distortion prior to the onset of clipping (like that terminology
better?

They use class D amps almost exclusively as subwoofer amplifiers precisely
for the reason that they sound crappy at any higher frequency.

There's no compromise necessary, when class A/B eliminates crossover
distortion while being much more efficient in the process.

No, it doesn't.

As you've agreed (and as I can prove in at least two papers I can think of
that were published in Wireless World), crossover distortion is decreased
to negligible levels in a typical class A/B design. Well below the 1%
minimum value that's cited in the literature as a working threshold of
audibility for crossover distortion (want the reference? how
about the pdf?).

Class A does not offer anything that class A/B does not.

Yes, it does.

Ok, I'll bite. What does it offer that A/B does not?

As I said already, yet you felt the need to argue with anyway, class A/B
offers all the benefits of class B, but eliminates crossover distortion in
the process.

No, it doesn't. Read the Conclusions section.
http://www.aikenamps.com/CrossoverDistortion.htm

Sorry, even your link agrees with me (why is it you always post websites
as links, while my references are original studies published in
peer-reviewed journals?). It says "As can be seen from the pictures, a
class AB amplifier can produce a varying amount of crossover distortion,
depending upon where the bias point is set." This is what I've said all
along. I said that the only way you can get a significant (read: audible)
level of crossover distortion out of a class A/B amp is if your bias is
out of whack. Please show me a car amplifier that comes off the line with
the bias out of whack. It manifests itself in the form of THD under most
measurements, so in order for this to be audible, the THD of the amplifier
would have to be greater than 1% and crossover distortion must be
demonstrated to be the culprit.

That's because they do. Find me one class D amp that exhibits an audible
level of distortion prior to the onset of clipping (like that terminology
better?

They use class D amps almost exclusively as subwoofer amplifiers precisely
for the reason that they sound crappy at any higher frequency.

The distortion content is proportional to the frequency in class D
amplifiers because of the way they work. They're designed for low
frequencies because the effective pwm freq is low enough to impinge upon
high frequency signals. But it's moot, because there's typically a
LPF at the output of these amps anyway.

"MZ" wrote in message
news

No, it doesn't. Read the Conclusions section.
http://www.aikenamps.com/CrossoverDistortion.htm

Sorry, even your link agrees with me (why is it you always post websites
as links, while my references are original studies published in
peer-reviewed journals?). It says "As can be seen from the pictures, a
class AB amplifier can produce a varying amount of crossover distortion,
depending upon where the bias point is set." This is what I've said all
along.

You just said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". Jesus, what a
moron.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
That's because they do. Find me one class D amp that exhibits an
audible
level of distortion prior to the onset of clipping (like that
terminology
better?

They use class D amps almost exclusively as subwoofer amplifiers
precisely
for the reason that they sound crappy at any higher frequency.

The distortion content is proportional to the frequency in class D
amplifiers because of the way they work.

Duh!

You just said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". Jesus, what a
moron.

Man, you're slow. I said "Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown."

"MZ" wrote:




What a total load of crap, and backpedaling. A/B was not designed to
eliminate
crossover distortion. What a load of horse****. Class A amplifiers
already did
that. The output devices conduct all the time. Class B was designed to be
more
efficient. Class A/B was designed to compromise, not to eliminate
crossover
distortion.

There's no compromise necessary, when class A/B eliminates crossover
distortion while being much more efficient in the process. According to
Merriam-Webster, compromise means "a settlement of differences by
arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions." As much as your
stereo review magazines would like to claim, there is no mutual
concession. Class A does not offer anything that class A/B does not.

As I said already, yet you felt the need to argue with anyway, class A/B
offers all the benefits of class B, but eliminates crossover distortion in
the process.

Over the years I've studied the issue of 'amplifier' sound carefully. Results
from blind listening comparions of approximately 100 different power amplifiers
(dating back to 1976; thousands of trials and dozens of subjects) have failed
to show any amplifier that was functioning normally (driving a speaker load
without operating fault, clipping or frequency response variations greater than
+/- 0.1 dB when measured at the speaker terminals) was audible using
commercially available recorded music. EVER.

I personally 15 separate power amplifiers (not counting the ones driving my
active home speakers) of all ages and types (except tubes) and none of them is
distinguishable from any other when driving typical loudspeaker loads. In the
most recent double blind ABX test that I personally conducted I compared a
2-channel Adcom car audio amplifier using a 12-volt power supply to a Bryston
4B-NRB home/pro power amplifier drving a pair of PSB Stratus Minis and found
the amplifiers to be completely transparent to each other.

Back in the late 70s SMWTMS, a Detroit area audio club ran a blind test to see
how much different the power output of a nominally competent amplifier had to
be to produce an audible difference. The answer was astounding. A power
difference of 10 vs 400-watts rated power was needed to produce an audibly
reliable difference.

For most practical purposes 'amps is amps'

"MZ" wrote in message
news
You just said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". Jesus, what
a
moron.

Man, you're slow. I said "Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown."

You said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". You're wrong, again,
and backpedaling as fast as possible.

Man, you're slow. I said "Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown."

You said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". You're wrong, again,
and backpedaling as fast as possible.

Again, you selectively choose quotes and try to remove context from the
equation. In the process, you try to suggest that I meant that there was
ZERO distortion (rather than negligible distortion) DESPITE THE FACT THAT
I ALREADY STATED THERE WAS DISTORTION, as the quote I provided *proves*.

So this is about the 10th time you've been proven wrong in this thread,
and you've resorted to setting up a strawman yet again. You may be the most
illogical person I've ever encountered in USENET newsgroups.
Congratulations.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
Man, you're slow. I said "Since it's impossible to bias perfectly,
some crossover distortion results. It's insignificant, as many reports
have shown."

You said "class A/B eliminates crossover distortion". You're wrong,
again,
and backpedaling as fast as possible.

Again, you selectively choose quotes and try to remove context from the
equation. In the process, you try to suggest that I meant that there was
ZERO distortion (rather than negligible distortion) DESPITE THE FACT THAT
I ALREADY STATED THERE WAS DISTORTION, as the quote I provided *proves*.

So this is about the 10th time you've been proven wrong in this thread,

Are you joking? You're the one who said class A/B design eliminated
crossover distortion. If you meant it eliminated it to "negligible levels",
then that means class B amps exhibit audible distortion. But according to
you, no such amps exist. Now go back to watching your Cracker Jack
oscilloscope, while the rest of us talk about how music actually sounds.

Are you joking? You're the one who said class A/B design eliminated
crossover distortion. If you meant it eliminated it to "negligible levels",
then that means class B amps exhibit audible distortion.

Huh? Negligible is not the same as audible. In fact, negligible, or the term that I've
been consistently using in this thread "insignificant", implies inaudible.
And, when the terms are defined in this thread to mean that exactly, as
I've already done, then there's no other conclusion that you can reach -
unless your goal is to be disingenuous, which by now is clearly the case.

Can't you go peddle your bull**** elsewhere? For days, you haven't even been
discussing the issue. You've been trying to play the semantics game,
trying to suggest that I've meant things that I CLEARLY don't mean (by
"clearly", I mean that each time you've suggested I meant something that I
didn't, I've provided QUOTES that PROVE otherwise). Any facts that have
been offered to you have gone completely ignored, thinking that you know more than the experts whose names you'd
only recognize because they happen to have ended up as the brand names of the
equipment you buy. I've offered original research papers to you in
pdf form on several occasions, yet you have absolutely no interest in
learning something new from experts who are published in respected
peer-reviewed audio journals.

Keep playing your word games if you'd like. I'll have no more of it.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
Are you joking? You're the one who said class A/B design eliminated
crossover distortion. If you meant it eliminated it to "negligible
levels",
then that means class B amps exhibit audible distortion.

Huh? Negligible is not the same as audible. In fact, negligible, or the
term that I've
been consistently using in this thread "insignificant", implies inaudible.
And, when the terms are defined in this thread to mean that exactly, as
I've already done, then there's no other conclusion that you can reach -
unless your goal is to be disingenuous, which by now is clearly the case.

Can't you go peddle your bull**** elsewhere? For days, you haven't even
been
discussing the issue. You've been trying to play the semantics game,
trying to suggest that I've meant things that I CLEARLY don't mean (by
"clearly", I mean that each time you've suggested I meant something that I
didn't, I've provided QUOTES that PROVE otherwise). Any facts that have
been offered to you have gone completely ignored, thinking that you know
more than the experts whose names you'd
only recognize because they happen to have ended up as the brand names of
the
equipment you buy. I've offered original research papers to you in
pdf form on several occasions, yet you have absolutely no interest in
learning something new from experts who are published in respected
peer-reviewed audio journals.

Keep playing your word games if you'd like. I'll have no more of it.

That is all he knows how to do. He refuses to answer questions and the only
thing he can do is play the semantics game. Yet, when I call him on his own
BS he doesn't want to play anymore.

I also like how he does not address Tom's most recent post saying that of
the hundreds of tests, properly done, and thousands of people that people
cannot hear the difference. Funny how he refuses to respond to the facts.

Les

"Les" wrote in message
...

I also like how he does not address Tom's most recent post saying that of
the hundreds of tests, properly done, and thousands of people that people
cannot hear the difference. Funny how he refuses to respond to the facts.

Why respond? His post made sense. He reported some results, I reported
some results. He's right and I'm right. But he never tried to tell me what
happened didn't happen, unlike you 2 clowns. Now go watch your music, since
you obviously don't listen to it.

"jeffc" wrote in message
m...

"Les" wrote in message
...

I also like how he does not address Tom's most recent post saying that
of
the hundreds of tests, properly done, and thousands of people that
people
cannot hear the difference. Funny how he refuses to respond to the
facts.

Why respond? His post made sense. He reported some results, I reported
some results. He's right and I'm right. But he never tried to tell me
what
happened didn't happen, unlike you 2 clowns. Now go watch your music,
since
you obviously don't listen to it.


Bad day at McDonalds?

If you had any reading comprehension skills it would be plain to see that
Tom is refuting your claims with valid, published data. You both cannot be
right on the issue. There either is a difference or there is not a
difference. I never doubted that you heard differences, or thought you did,
but you did not implement the proper controls to your "tests" for them to
have been valid comparisons. What he said was that "for most practical
purposes 'amps is amps'". That goes in direct contrast to what you are
saying. But since you couldn't play semantics nor provide data to back your
claim up you just choose not to respond.

Oh, and have you had any luck getting speaker wires to pick up ground loops
yet? Once you do let us know so we can rewrite physics.

Les

"Les" wrote in message
...
\
If you had any reading comprehension skills it would be plain to see that
Tom is refuting your claims with valid, published data.

No, he didn't.

You both cannot be right on the issue.

What exactly did he write that contradicts what I wrote?

There either is a difference or there is not a
difference. I never doubted that you heard differences, or thought you
did,
but you did not implement the proper controls to your "tests" for them to
have been valid comparisons.

Yes, I did.

What he said was that "for most practical
purposes 'amps is amps'". That goes in direct contrast to what you are
saying.

No, it didn't. I heard a difference between 2 amps. Just because you 2
guys have never experienced the same thing, and many others have never
experienced the same, amounts to exactly this: nothing. I've also heard the
difference between 2 CD players, which is actually more relevant since 1 of
them could actually have been used in a car. There are also plenty of
pieces of audio gear that I couldn't distinguish. And I also happen to know
there are plenty of people who couldn't hear a difference where I did.
Don't blame me for your crappy hearing. Now go back to playing with your
oscilloscope and let those of us who know what we're doing do the actual
music listening.

Oh, and have you had any luck getting speaker wires to pick up ground
loops
yet?

I thought you didn't like playing semantics. Or should I say, just plain
lying. Nice try, again.

What he said was that "for most practical
purposes 'amps is amps'". That goes in direct contrast to what you are
saying.

No, it didn't. I heard a difference between 2 amps. Just because you 2
guys have never experienced the same thing, and many others have never
experienced the same, amounts to exactly this: nothing.

As I said before, this is groundbreaking information. You should try to
publish this data as a service to the audio community.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
What he said was that "for most practical
purposes 'amps is amps'". That goes in direct contrast to what you are
saying.

No, it didn't. I heard a difference between 2 amps. Just because you 2
guys have never experienced the same thing, and many others have never
experienced the same, amounts to exactly this: nothing.

As I said before, this is groundbreaking information.

No, it's not.

You should try to publish this data as a service to the audio community.

I already posted it here for the RAC community.

As I said before, this is groundbreaking information.

No, it's not.

Since the general concensus in the audio community, at least in terms of
what has been published in peer-reviewed journals, is contrary to your
findings, then yes it is groundbreaking. It directly challenges the data
that some very well established players in the industry have collected.

You should try to publish this data as a service to the audio community.

I already posted it here for the RAC community.

There is, of course, a difference. I'm sure I don't have to point out
what it is.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
I already posted it here for the RAC community.

There is, of course, a difference. I'm sure I don't have to point out
what it is.

That you're a complete tool?

Durn intellectuals!I was posting regarding the Klipschorns and how they
sounded better with a tube amp...This thread took on a new life, no I dont
have any tube amps in my car!!My point way way back was to demonstrate how
amps can sound different within certain systems.You guys are reiterating the
same "All amps sound the same" argument that was discussed 25 years ago
within the pages of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound.Anyone remember Bob
Carvers challenge to Stereophile in the early 80's?
"Les" wrote in message
...
Scott, well I assume this is Scott and not Barb.

I take it you have tube amps in your car?

How reliable have they been, and what kind of roads/driving conditions do
they see?

How effecient are they?

From your first post I assume to you the tube amps sound better, but is
the
quality difference noticeable going down the road?

BTW, I am not trying to argue with you I have just never talked with
anyone
that has had all tube amps in their car.

Les

"scott and barb" . wrote in message
link.net...
Sounds like you need one of them there single-endeds..Seriously, though
find
an old 6bq5 amp push-pull approx 12 watts per channel with decent output
transformers on those Klipschorns.....Typically great midrange.....
"Trader" wrote in message
t...
Well I agree with everything you wrote. However, there are many here
who
believe that amps all sound the same. This doesn't make sense because
how
could an amp with a superior circuit design and premium parts sound
the
same
as a RadioShack special. I've personally have auditioned many amps on
my
Klipschorns and can testify that all amps don't sound the same. I
don't
buy
into the theory that distortion is what I'm hearing because even at
moderate
levels I can hear a substantial difference. I'm sure that some
speakers
are
not revealing enough to hear much of a difference but with Klipschorns
you
hear everything that is present. My Father in-law is an engineer and
he
has
a cheap Bose system and it sounds like ****. He laughed when I bought
a
tube amp for my Klipschorns and thought that it couldn't possibly
sound
good. Well it sounded amazing although I still prefer my SS amp. But
yeah
believe what you want and buy the low-end gear if it makes you happy.


"jeffc" wrote in message
...

"jeffc" wrote in message
...
Like I said to begin with, believe it or not, weight is a pretty
decent
indicator of quality (including power output and headroom.) Of
course,
we're
not talking about tube amps here.

Having said that, check out this. Again, search on "weight"
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/875/
Heh heh.

Some people like tubes, that's fine.
There are measureable and hearable differences in tube amps vs solid state
so whichever you prefer.

This is also debatable. It depends entirely on the particular amp and how
it's being used. In any case, I think any possible differences between
the two are greatly exaggerated.


Sterophile and The Absolute Sound are not 2 sources that I would rely on for
technical, unbiased information.

But nonetheless in all my years of this debate I have never had someone
present a technical reason as to why they can "hear" a difference when any
differences that are there are well below the human threshold of hearing.
When someone can at least provide a working theory for that then I'll start
to listen.

I think there are plenty of counterpoints that are worth listening to.
But arguments such as "test equipment isn't as accurate as the human auditory
system" or "implementing proper controls isn't important" don't fly.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
Some people like tubes, that's fine.
There are measureable and hearable differences in tube amps vs solid
state
so whichever you prefer.

This is also debatable. It depends entirely on the particular amp and how
it's being used. In any case, I think any possible differences between
the two are greatly exaggerated.

Agreed. But with tube amps there is at least a leg to stand on. I know
people that think that 10% (more in some cases) distortion is acceptable.

Sterophile and The Absolute Sound are not 2 sources that I would rely on
for
technical, unbiased information.

But nonetheless in all my years of this debate I have never had someone
present a technical reason as to why they can "hear" a difference when
any
differences that are there are well below the human threshold of
hearing.
When someone can at least provide a working theory for that then I'll
start
to listen.

I think there are plenty of counterpoints that are worth listening to.
But arguments such as "test equipment isn't as accurate as the human
auditory
system" or "implementing proper controls isn't important" don't fly.

I wish that we could find someone here that could give some of these
counterpoints so that we could have a reasonable discussion. But everything
I have seen here has always been what you listed in the latter part of your
post.

Les

I think there are plenty of counterpoints that are worth listening to.
But arguments such as "test equipment isn't as accurate as the human
auditory
system" or "implementing proper controls isn't important" don't fly.

I wish that we could find someone here that could give some of these
counterpoints so that we could have a reasonable discussion. But everything
I have seen here has always been what you listed in the latter part of your
post.

There HAS been a reasonable discussion in this thread, if you ignore the
subjectivists. On the bright side, it's prompted me to scan a few
original research papers to host as pdfs for folks interested in learning more
rather than folks who prefer to close the doors of their minds to
information that's new to them. And hopefully others will decide to do
the same.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
I think there are plenty of counterpoints that are worth listening to.
But arguments such as "test equipment isn't as accurate as the human
auditory
system" or "implementing proper controls isn't important" don't fly.

I wish that we could find someone here that could give some of these
counterpoints so that we could have a reasonable discussion. But
everything
I have seen here has always been what you listed in the latter part of
your
post.

There HAS been a reasonable discussion in this thread, if you ignore the
subjectivists. On the bright side, it's prompted me to scan a few
original research papers to host as pdfs for folks interested in learning
more
rather than folks who prefer to close the doors of their minds to
information that's new to them. And hopefully others will decide to do
the same.

I must have missed it All I saw were the subjectiveists.

If you have any of those scanned shoot them to me in an email or post them
here. I'm always looking for more information. You can mail them to
.

Les

"Les" wrote in message
...
But nonetheless the focus of the discussion is on SS amps and tubes have
no
place in this particular discussion.

Says who? You the new net nazi?

Sterophile and The Absolute Sound are not 2 sources that I would rely on
for
technical, unbiased information.

That's because you watch music, you don't listen to it.

When someone can at least provide a working theory for that then I'll
start
to listen.

Right.

"MZ" wrote in message
news

This is also debatable. It depends entirely on the particular amp and how
it's being used. In any case, I think any possible differences between
the two are greatly exaggerated.

But you can't hear them, so how would you know?