Forwarded because I wouldn't want Arny to think I talk about him or his
monkey behind his back. -- AJ

Andre Jute wrote:
If either if you two blustering nincompoop pinheads, Pinkothicko and
Poop Bear aka Graham (1), had been awake and paying attention any time
in the last ten or fifteen years, you would have known that I spent
years explaining to the ultrafidelista that their amplifiers are loaded
with negative feedback. that SRPP is not a constant current device but
in fact a form of cathode follower, that cathode followers are negative
feedback devices, that their beloved DHT sound so good because the
feedback is built in, in short that feedback is a natural concomitant
of audio engineering, as it is of virtually all engineering.

If either of you two mouthfoaming spittle-spraying moldgrowths had been
sober and attentive, you would have discovered that we discussed
internal feedback in a 300B at some length on RAT earlier this year.
But Pinkothicko, in that thread as in others, instead of learning from
his betters, ponced around sneering and jeering, jerking out insults
while the workers and grafters among us determined that the internal FB
in a 300B amounts to possibly as much as 14dB.

My beef isn't with feedback per se--I've clearly thought on it longer
and more deeply than you two have--but with quarterwits like you two
who think the world stopped turning the day they left whatever
tenth-rate school "edjicated" them.

You two impertinent wannabe anklenippers owe me an apology.

Andre Jute

(1) Arny's ignorance is as inexcusable, though at least he doesn't hang
around tube conferences trying to drain the glee from everyone else's
hobby, so he can't be blamed for not knowing that I know quite as much
as he does about feedback, and a damn sight more about double blind
testing. That Arnie drains the glee from silicon hobbyists is of course
no less reprehensible. But in this instance, Arny's ignorance is the
result of a wilful misreading of what I wrote, magnified by his usual
slimily immoral debating technique, which at least is preferable to the
soup of half-forgotten textbook rule of thumb incomprehension in which
the tenth-raters Pinkothicko and Poop Bear aka Graham flounder.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:09:03 +0000, Pooh Bear
wrote:



Patrick Turner wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

From the KISS AMP archive at Jute on Amps
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Andre Jute explains why an ultrafi tube amplifier has Zero Negative
Feedback

Andre Jute is clearly a moron.

Graham

Well methinks moron is a very weary word to use about a description
of a simple amplifier technique that is quite valid for those
not wishing to use loop NFB.

Just what would you do if someone told you that you must not
use NFB?

Maybe you'd tell em to get nicked.

OK, fine, but what if you explored the idea?

Can you think around this idea of no loop FB, without
straight away conjuring up ideas about morons?

When you say 'loop NFB' do you mean overall NFB as opposed to local NFB ?

I actually use considerable local NFB in my own ( transistor ) designs before
using modest overall NFB to acheive the final result. There are several reasons
for this. I just prefer the idea of nice linear stages in the signal path rather
than correcting them 'after the event' so to speak. Also, applying local NFB
increaes the stage bandwidth and reduces the phase lag of the individual stages
thus leading to better overall stability considerations.

Without any NFB, the best that can be acheived is the basic linearity of the
amplifying device and this really isn't very satisfactory ( except to someone
with cloth ears maybe ).

I simply detest the unthinking 'all NFB is bad' idea that clowns like Jute seem
to have picked up which is seemingly based on a valid critique of some bad
practice that was widespread in the 70s. Actually a lot of the problem back then
was also a lack of decentfast devices - but that's another story.

The truth is that NFB is essential to any high quality audio device. Those who
want 1930s listening quality are welcome to it.

More to the point, sad old clowns like Jute seem quite unaware that
their beloved SET amps are jampacked full of NFB - it just happens to
be inside the bottles, rather like your own local NFB.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

What was the name of thread where the 50db comment was made? What time
frame are you speaking of?

You made the KISS amp with Triodes correct?
If so you used NFB by virtue of those tubes, right?


"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Forwarded because I wouldn't want Arny to think I talk about him or his
monkey behind his back. -- AJ

Andre Jute wrote:
If either if you two blustering nincompoop pinheads, Pinkothicko and
Poop Bear aka Graham (1), had been awake and paying attention any time
in the last ten or fifteen years, you would have known that I spent
years explaining to the ultrafidelista that their amplifiers are loaded
with negative feedback. that SRPP is not a constant current device but
in fact a form of cathode follower, that cathode followers are negative
feedback devices, that their beloved DHT sound so good because the
feedback is built in, in short that feedback is a natural concomitant
of audio engineering, as it is of virtually all engineering.

If either of you two mouthfoaming spittle-spraying moldgrowths had been
sober and attentive, you would have discovered that we discussed
internal feedback in a 300B at some length on RAT earlier this year.
But Pinkothicko, in that thread as in others, instead of learning from
his betters, ponced around sneering and jeering, jerking out insults
while the workers and grafters among us determined that the internal FB
in a 300B amounts to possibly as much as 14dB.

My beef isn't with feedback per se--I've clearly thought on it longer
and more deeply than you two have--but with quarterwits like you two
who think the world stopped turning the day they left whatever
tenth-rate school "edjicated" them.

You two impertinent wannabe anklenippers owe me an apology.

Andre Jute

(1) Arny's ignorance is as inexcusable, though at least he doesn't hang
around tube conferences trying to drain the glee from everyone else's
hobby, so he can't be blamed for not knowing that I know quite as much
as he does about feedback, and a damn sight more about double blind
testing. That Arnie drains the glee from silicon hobbyists is of course
no less reprehensible. But in this instance, Arny's ignorance is the
result of a wilful misreading of what I wrote, magnified by his usual
slimily immoral debating technique, which at least is preferable to the
soup of half-forgotten textbook rule of thumb incomprehension in which
the tenth-raters Pinkothicko and Poop Bear aka Graham flounder.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:09:03 +0000, Pooh Bear
wrote:



Patrick Turner wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

From the KISS AMP archive at Jute on Amps
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record
Review

Andre Jute explains why an ultrafi tube amplifier has Zero
Negative
Feedback

Andre Jute is clearly a moron.

Graham

Well methinks moron is a very weary word to use about a description
of a simple amplifier technique that is quite valid for those
not wishing to use loop NFB.

Just what would you do if someone told you that you must not
use NFB?

Maybe you'd tell em to get nicked.

OK, fine, but what if you explored the idea?

Can you think around this idea of no loop FB, without
straight away conjuring up ideas about morons?

When you say 'loop NFB' do you mean overall NFB as opposed to local
NFB ?

I actually use considerable local NFB in my own ( transistor ) designs
before
using modest overall NFB to acheive the final result. There are
several reasons
for this. I just prefer the idea of nice linear stages in the signal
path rather
than correcting them 'after the event' so to speak. Also, applying
local NFB
increaes the stage bandwidth and reduces the phase lag of the
individual stages
thus leading to better overall stability considerations.

Without any NFB, the best that can be acheived is the basic linearity
of the
amplifying device and this really isn't very satisfactory ( except to
someone
with cloth ears maybe ).

I simply detest the unthinking 'all NFB is bad' idea that clowns like
Jute seem
to have picked up which is seemingly based on a valid critique of some
bad
practice that was widespread in the 70s. Actually a lot of the problem
back then
was also a lack of decentfast devices - but that's another story.

The truth is that NFB is essential to any high quality audio device.
Those who
want 1930s listening quality are welcome to it.

More to the point, sad old clowns like Jute seem quite unaware that
their beloved SET amps are jampacked full of NFB - it just happens to
be inside the bottles, rather like your own local NFB.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

wrote:

What was the name of thread where the 50db comment was made? What time
frame are you speaking of?

You made the KISS amp with Triodes correct?
If so you used NFB by virtue of those tubes, right?

But why try to score a cheap point just for the sake of it?

What is being discussed is the effect of the overal loop NFB
that is applied around an amp and NOT the NFB within the triode
due to combined electrostatic action of the anode voltage and grid voltage
upon the electron stream.

The loop FB and the internal FB are different animals.

Patrick Turner.



"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Forwarded because I wouldn't want Arny to think I talk about him or his
monkey behind his back. -- AJ

Andre Jute wrote:
If either if you two blustering nincompoop pinheads, Pinkothicko and
Poop Bear aka Graham (1), had been awake and paying attention any time
in the last ten or fifteen years, you would have known that I spent
years explaining to the ultrafidelista that their amplifiers are loaded
with negative feedback. that SRPP is not a constant current device but
in fact a form of cathode follower, that cathode followers are negative
feedback devices, that their beloved DHT sound so good because the
feedback is built in, in short that feedback is a natural concomitant
of audio engineering, as it is of virtually all engineering.

If either of you two mouthfoaming spittle-spraying moldgrowths had been
sober and attentive, you would have discovered that we discussed
internal feedback in a 300B at some length on RAT earlier this year.
But Pinkothicko, in that thread as in others, instead of learning from
his betters, ponced around sneering and jeering, jerking out insults
while the workers and grafters among us determined that the internal FB
in a 300B amounts to possibly as much as 14dB.

My beef isn't with feedback per se--I've clearly thought on it longer
and more deeply than you two have--but with quarterwits like you two
who think the world stopped turning the day they left whatever
tenth-rate school "edjicated" them.

You two impertinent wannabe anklenippers owe me an apology.

Andre Jute

(1) Arny's ignorance is as inexcusable, though at least he doesn't hang
around tube conferences trying to drain the glee from everyone else's
hobby, so he can't be blamed for not knowing that I know quite as much
as he does about feedback, and a damn sight more about double blind
testing. That Arnie drains the glee from silicon hobbyists is of course
no less reprehensible. But in this instance, Arny's ignorance is the
result of a wilful misreading of what I wrote, magnified by his usual
slimily immoral debating technique, which at least is preferable to the
soup of half-forgotten textbook rule of thumb incomprehension in which
the tenth-raters Pinkothicko and Poop Bear aka Graham flounder.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:09:03 +0000, Pooh Bear
wrote:



Patrick Turner wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

From the KISS AMP archive at Jute on Amps
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News & Record
Review

Andre Jute explains why an ultrafi tube amplifier has Zero
Negative
Feedback

Andre Jute is clearly a moron.

Graham

Well methinks moron is a very weary word to use about a description
of a simple amplifier technique that is quite valid for those
not wishing to use loop NFB.

Just what would you do if someone told you that you must not
use NFB?

Maybe you'd tell em to get nicked.

OK, fine, but what if you explored the idea?

Can you think around this idea of no loop FB, without
straight away conjuring up ideas about morons?

When you say 'loop NFB' do you mean overall NFB as opposed to local
NFB ?

I actually use considerable local NFB in my own ( transistor ) designs
before
using modest overall NFB to acheive the final result. There are
several reasons
for this. I just prefer the idea of nice linear stages in the signal
path rather
than correcting them 'after the event' so to speak. Also, applying
local NFB
increaes the stage bandwidth and reduces the phase lag of the
individual stages
thus leading to better overall stability considerations.

Without any NFB, the best that can be acheived is the basic linearity
of the
amplifying device and this really isn't very satisfactory ( except to
someone
with cloth ears maybe ).

I simply detest the unthinking 'all NFB is bad' idea that clowns like
Jute seem
to have picked up which is seemingly based on a valid critique of some
bad
practice that was widespread in the 70s. Actually a lot of the problem
back then
was also a lack of decentfast devices - but that's another story.

The truth is that NFB is essential to any high quality audio device.
Those who
want 1930s listening quality are welcome to it.

More to the point, sad old clowns like Jute seem quite unaware that
their beloved SET amps are jampacked full of NFB - it just happens to
be inside the bottles, rather like your own local NFB.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
...


wrote:

What was the name of thread where the 50db comment was made? What time
frame are you speaking of?

You made the KISS amp with Triodes correct?
If so you used NFB by virtue of those tubes, right?

But why try to score a cheap point just for the sake of it?

What is being discussed is the effect of the overal loop NFB
that is applied around an amp and NOT the NFB within the triode
due to combined electrostatic action of the anode voltage and grid voltage
upon the electron stream.

The loop FB and the internal FB are different animals.

Patrick Turner.

I just wanted to determine what was actually being discussed and if Mr. Jute
was actually aware of the NFB from triodes, since I have seen other tube
lovers who weren't.




"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...
Forwarded because I wouldn't want Arny to think I talk about him or his
monkey behind his back. -- AJ

Andre Jute wrote:
If either if you two blustering nincompoop pinheads, Pinkothicko and
Poop Bear aka Graham (1), had been awake and paying attention any time
in the last ten or fifteen years, you would have known that I spent
years explaining to the ultrafidelista that their amplifiers are
loaded
with negative feedback. that SRPP is not a constant current device but
in fact a form of cathode follower, that cathode followers are
negative
feedback devices, that their beloved DHT sound so good because the
feedback is built in, in short that feedback is a natural concomitant
of audio engineering, as it is of virtually all engineering.

If either of you two mouthfoaming spittle-spraying moldgrowths had
been
sober and attentive, you would have discovered that we discussed
internal feedback in a 300B at some length on RAT earlier this year.
But Pinkothicko, in that thread as in others, instead of learning from
his betters, ponced around sneering and jeering, jerking out insults
while the workers and grafters among us determined that the internal
FB
in a 300B amounts to possibly as much as 14dB.

My beef isn't with feedback per se--I've clearly thought on it longer
and more deeply than you two have--but with quarterwits like you two
who think the world stopped turning the day they left whatever
tenth-rate school "edjicated" them.

You two impertinent wannabe anklenippers owe me an apology.

Andre Jute

(1) Arny's ignorance is as inexcusable, though at least he doesn't
hang
around tube conferences trying to drain the glee from everyone else's
hobby, so he can't be blamed for not knowing that I know quite as much
as he does about feedback, and a damn sight more about double blind
testing. That Arnie drains the glee from silicon hobbyists is of
course
no less reprehensible. But in this instance, Arny's ignorance is the
result of a wilful misreading of what I wrote, magnified by his usual
slimily immoral debating technique, which at least is preferable to
the
soup of half-forgotten textbook rule of thumb incomprehension in which
the tenth-raters Pinkothicko and Poop Bear aka Graham flounder.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:09:03 +0000, Pooh Bear
wrote:



Patrick Turner wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

From the KISS AMP archive at Jute on Amps
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site" -- Hi-Fi News &
Record
Review

Andre Jute explains why an ultrafi tube amplifier has Zero
Negative
Feedback

Andre Jute is clearly a moron.

Graham

Well methinks moron is a very weary word to use about a
description
of a simple amplifier technique that is quite valid for those
not wishing to use loop NFB.

Just what would you do if someone told you that you must not
use NFB?

Maybe you'd tell em to get nicked.

OK, fine, but what if you explored the idea?

Can you think around this idea of no loop FB, without
straight away conjuring up ideas about morons?

When you say 'loop NFB' do you mean overall NFB as opposed to local
NFB ?

I actually use considerable local NFB in my own ( transistor )
designs
before
using modest overall NFB to acheive the final result. There are
several reasons
for this. I just prefer the idea of nice linear stages in the
signal
path rather
than correcting them 'after the event' so to speak. Also, applying
local NFB
increaes the stage bandwidth and reduces the phase lag of the
individual stages
thus leading to better overall stability considerations.

Without any NFB, the best that can be acheived is the basic
linearity
of the
amplifying device and this really isn't very satisfactory ( except
to
someone
with cloth ears maybe ).

I simply detest the unthinking 'all NFB is bad' idea that clowns
like
Jute seem
to have picked up which is seemingly based on a valid critique of
some
bad
practice that was widespread in the 70s. Actually a lot of the
problem
back then
was also a lack of decentfast devices - but that's another story.

The truth is that NFB is essential to any high quality audio
device.
Those who
want 1930s listening quality are welcome to it.

More to the point, sad old clowns like Jute seem quite unaware that
their beloved SET amps are jampacked full of NFB - it just happens
to
be inside the bottles, rather like your own local NFB.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Nyobe Queen of Ignorance wrote: "Patrick Turner"
wrote in message
...

I just wanted to determine what was actually being discussed and if Mr. Jute
was actually aware of the NFB from triodes, since I have seen other tube
lovers who weren't.

You didn't even know enough about me to discover the significant fact
that I have been saying that for years, but you wrote half-a-dozen
vicious attack messages?

If you were a man, Nyobe who wants to be called Mike, you would be a
premature ejaculator.

Andre Jute

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

Nyobe Queen of Ignorance wrote: "Patrick Turner"
wrote in message
...

I just wanted to determine what was actually being discussed and if Mr.
Jute
was actually aware of the NFB from triodes, since I have seen other tube
lovers who weren't.

You didn't even know enough about me to discover the significant fact
that I have been saying that for years, but you wrote half-a-dozen
vicious attack messages?

I did nothing of the sort, I asked some pertinent questions, which you
ducked.


If you were a man, Nyob who wants to be called Mike, you would be a
premature ejaculator.

Andre Jute

Ever build the KISS amp?
Where is it?
Why are you so desperate that you create a sock to defend you who is
instantly caught lying?

You're kinda pathetic when cornered, you instantly start name calling and
crying.

You might be fun to play with for a while, but eventually you'll become
boring.
Probably very soon.
It's funny how much you remind me of our former idiot Dr. B.J. Quackenbush.
Well not funny ha ha, funny strange.

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

You didn't even know enough about me to discover the significant fact
that I have been saying that for years, but you wrote half-a-dozen
vicious attack messages?

As if the following isn't a vicious attack message! LOL!

If you were a man, Nyobe who wants to be called Mike, you would be a
premature ejaculator.

Andre Jute

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...

You didn't even know enough about me to discover the significant fact
that I have been saying that for years, but you wrote half-a-dozen
vicious attack messages?

As if the following isn't a vicious attack message! LOL!

If you were a man, Nyobe who wants to be called Mike, you would be a
premature ejaculator.

It's an attack, but I don't know that I would call it all that vicious, any
more than a yapping little dog is vicious.

Most of what Jute spews forth is intended to be nasty, but mostly it just
appears to be weak and like him, ineffectual.