New Design, SE 6005 Directly Coupled Audio Amplifier

[surfatwork]

I also think your " hearing is very subjective " comment - is also somewhat of a wishy-washy partial cop out.

We do have "ears" that aren't subjective, and hear the same everywhere, everytime. They are called "measuring instruments".
But as far as I know, human hearing is always subjective, entirely dependent on what's between the ears.

 

[fcon]

Every man has his own beliefs; in general, it is not good to try to change them.
If he convinces himself, it is even better, isn't it? It is less invasive and more acceptable.
Sometimes someone else finds better words for your own beliefs and is not a shame to use them.

These are some of my beliefs, as a 45 years experienced DIY-er, expressed with better words:
"The attempt to use specifications to characterize sonic performance is a failure.
Higher power, wider bandwidth and lower distortion do not necessarily mean better sound.
Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience." Nelson Pass

Dear colleagues: please be gentle with each other! This is a forum, not a court of law and certainly not a street fight!

 

[drlowmu]

One is entitled to think that what one builds is the bees knees - nothing wrong in thinking that. The problem starts when one starts thinking (delusionally?!) that everyone else is/was doing things wrong and only "I, me, myself" am doing things right. This grandstanding is wrong! And if grandstanding, one should be open to people opposing ones point of view and one should also be able to back ones conviction with rational explanations.

Also, quoting from the Grapes of Wrath or invoking sayings involving dogs, cats, rats, lions or elephants, is not a rational counter to anything!


I agree completely!

Dear Keith,

IF I was delusional as you mildly suggest, I would tend to side with you and agree with your assessment. But some parts of this thread have possibly gone over your head, and you do not understand WHY I am dong things very properly, that others do not think to do. Here are rational points I will make to you, that anyone should easily understand , except one narrow minded and factually incorrect E.E. who has been trolling here, and as usual, has no clue - as to what is correct in the audio art :

1) A two stage amplifier is the best possible configuration, VS any three stage tube amplifier . Less is more, in this case.

2) Wire leads are best when short, and the smallest lengths are usually the best, in practice. ( For example, 2 inches or less distance, RCA Input jack to Input tube 's control grid, .............99% missing..... in other's amp designs ! )

3) Smaller audio Output tubes will inherently sound the best, and they require use of efficient ( not usually consumer, often professional-use ) speakers ( ALE, rare Klangfilm pre WW2, ALTEC - GPA ).

4) The power supply is, and always will be, the dominating factor, of how good any audio amplifier is. How many times in this thread have I quoted Mr. Robert Fulton ?? " In the end, we all listen to a music- modulated power supply. How good is it ? "

Co incidental with number four above, no one to my knowledge in audio ( except my Mentor and I ) is building tube audio gear that has B+ supplies either heavily single or double series shunted ( with minimal parts per shunt, only three parts two resistors, and a capacitor position !! ).

See the Master Schematic, supplied herein, beginning on this thread's page one, and TRY to understand it.

ALSO, no one in tube audio applies power supply treatments such as double series Dennis Fraker Final Filters ( especially using the knowledge of how to multiple film-bypass these critical capacitor positions, in the supply ). No one I know of, in all of audio does these things, except Dennis, my Mentor, and I. Many people, such as the B.S. E.E. PhD untruthful troller here, do not understand how and why this is done !! What happens to the sonics in tube gear, when you gild the lily of the Power Supply? Answer that, I have for myself.

5) No one, in tube audio, knows to use NON-critical inductance power supply chokes in audio, ( as in an E.E.s textbook, for the past 100 years ). My audio mentor, Dennis and I introduced the new concept on line, and a few other smart / open EEs,, ( John Swenson and John L. Hasquin come to my mind) self-experimented and now employ versions of the same, despite being taught differently in their E.E. courses ! . See THIS openly displayed in this thread's page one ( third and fifth photos from the top of the page. I shared this valuable information ( if you actually listen to it's effect on the music's playback ) in this thread, with any and everyone. What ?? That 10 Ohm chokes did not cut the mustard, and showed all my installation of six Ohm DCR supply chokes. You won'r see that anywhere else on line.

So Keith, herein above, you have an honest and rational counter. It is the truth as I and others actually experience / hear it. the truth goes marching on. No one can deny it., without actually hearing the results. Or : "The proof of the pudding, is in the eating".

Thank you for contributing to the 6005 amp build thread.

Jeff

PS : " co-axial ( shielded ) cable have no field around them, are not subject to degradation." Not in my experience is this true !!
How come, we know not to wrap our system's Interconnect cables , tightly around the unit's Power Cord ??

 

[RtoR King]

I hardly bring up over 100 dB and a large radiating surface area on every post.

The fact is, in the tube world, the very best sounding output tubes ARE low powered. Make no mistake about that. To use the best sounding output tubes, requires a high efficiency system.

As a recent ( exciting to me ) example, this 6005 output tube amp beats every other output tube, and it's accompanying amp, I have ever built or ever heard. YMMV. It does this by a subjective estimated factor - of perhaps 20 percent. It is the output tube mostly doing this here, and a reasonable circuit. But the 6005 output tube only has a 12 Watt rated plate, and is outputting maybe 1.5 Watts in tetrode mode.

A 97 to 98 dB small radiating area speaker is unusable . Why force yourself into lesser options??? Start off right ...... and you are " there " for the rest of your life. People need to be taught this Prem. I wish I was, when I was in my 20s.

Jeff

After all the recent direct, but still polite posts above, this post shows not one bit sank in!

The fact is, in the tube world, the very best sounding output tubes ARE low powered. Make no mistake about that.

Says who? What is the current percentage of SET amps in use today versus all other topologies?

As a recent ( exciting to me ) example, this 6005 output tube amp beats every other output tube

Perhaps it does on your specific application and listening preferences. But that does not mean it's the best audio output tube. There is no best audio output tube as there are so many varied and different applications.

A 97 to 98 dB small radiating area speaker is unusable . Why force yourself into lesser options??? Start off right ......

Unusable for you perhaps. But who says anything else is a lesser option? Who says buying a less efficient speaker and a more powerful amplifier is not "right"?

EDIT: I should have moved to the next page before writing this. Post #301 above is an even better example!

 

[drlowmu]

01 - 07- 2022 ............EXCITING NEWS.... things CHANGED, an " INCLUSIVE " amp for listeners with LESS than 101 dB SPEAKERS

Very latest - amplifier design news.

The listening result to the new amp, has been outstanding ( to my experience ) this past week. So much so that my audio mentor and I , just developed a plan, to also build a similar triple-the-power amp. It should power my ALTEC A7-8s 15 inch woofer better. As a bonus, it also be useful with a wider variety of borderline - efficiency speakers in the high 90s !! Different Input - Driver tube, to maximize the circuit. Ohh boy, the quest for never ceases.

Jeff

 

[RtoR King]

PS : " co-axial ( shielded ) cable have no field around them, are not subject to degradation." Not in my experience is this true !!
How come, we know not to wrap our system's Interconnect cables , tightly around the unit's Power Cord ??

And I will answer this. Again you cannot apply "common sense physics" to complex subjects such as electrical engineering.

A magnetic field attenuates with the square of the distance. So yes, twisting a power cord with an audio interconnect is not a good idea. But a few inches away and even with 90 degree crossovers, little interference occurs.

Now how much is "little"?

Well I still would keep AC cords at lease a foot for a magnetic phono cable. But a line level interconnect, I may even run an AC cord loosely next to it.

Still a better answer is found below but is actually many more questions.

What is the effective shield coverage of the audio cable shield?
What is the DC resistance and AC impedance of the audio shield at audio frequencies?
What is the impedance driving the cable?
What is the amplitude of the audio signal?
What is the magnitude of the AC power cord field across the audio cable?

And I probably missed a few things.

Let's say I work for Denon, or even Kenwood, Sansui, in the old days. I am releasing the design to make an initial run of 10,000 units.

Do you really think these parameters were not calculated and tested? And yes, I'm sure they also had many empirical listening tests as well with staff audio reproduction experts, not necessarily design engineers..

 

[Dr.Gary]

Dear Keith,

IF I was delusional as you mildly suggest, I would tend to side with you and agree with your assessment. But some parts of this thread have possibly gone over your head, and you do not understand WHY I am dong things very properly, that others do not think to do. Here are rational points I will make to you, that anyone should easily understand , except one narrow minded and factually incorrect E.E. who has been trolling here, and as usual, has no clue - as to what is correct in the audio art :

1) A two stage amplifier is the best possible configuration, VS any three stage tube amplifier . Less is more, in this case.

2) Wire leads are best when short, and the smallest lengths are usually the best, in practice. ( For example, 2 inches or less distance, RCA Input jack to Input tube 's control grid, .............99% missing..... in other's amp designs ! )

3) Smaller audio Output tubes will inherently sound the best, and they require use of efficient ( not usually consumer, often professional-use ) speakers ( ALE, rare Klangfilm pre WW2, ALTEC - GPA ).

4) The power supply is, and always will be, the dominating factor, of how good any audio amplifier is. How many times in this thread have I quoted Mr. Robert Fulton ?? " In the end, we all listen to a music- modulated power supply. How good is it ? "

Co incidental with number four above, no one to my knowledge in audio ( except my Mentor and I ) is building tube audio gear that has B+ supplies either heavily single or double series shunted ( with minimal parts per shunt, only three parts two resistors, and a capacitor position !! ).

See the Master Schematic, supplied herein, beginning on this thread's page one, and TRY to understand it.

ALSO, no one in tube audio applies power supply treatments such as double series Dennis Fraker Final Filters ( especially using the knowledge of how to multiple film-bypass these critical capacitor positions, in the supply ). No one I know of, in all of audio does these things, except Dennis, my Mentor, and I. Many people, such as the B.S. E.E. PhD untruthful troller here, do not understand how and why this is done !! What happens to the sonics in tube gear, when you gild the lily of the Power Supply? Answer that, I have for myself.

5) No one, in tube audio, knows to use NON-critical inductance power supply chokes in audio, ( as in an E.E.s textbook, for the past 100 years ). My audio mentor, Dennis and I introduced the new concept on line, and a few other smart / open EEs,, ( John Swenson and John L. Hasquin come to my mind) self-experimented and now employ versions of the same, despite being taught differently in their E.E. courses ! . See THIS openly displayed in this thread's page one ( third and fifth photos from the top of the page. I shared this valuable information ( if you actually listen to it's effect on the music's playback ) in this thread, with any and everyone. What ?? That 10 Ohm chokes did not cut the mustard, and showed all my installation of six Ohm DCR supply chokes. You won'r see that anywhere else on line.

So Keith, herein above, you have an honest and rational counter. It is the truth as I and others actually experience / hear it. the truth goes marching on. No one can deny it., without actually hearing the results. Or : "The proof of the pudding, is in the eating".

Thank you for contributing to the 6005 amp build thread.

Jeff

PS : " co-axial ( shielded ) cable have no field around them, are not subject to degradation." Not in my experience is this true !!
How come, we know not to wrap our system's Interconnect cables , tightly around the unit's Power Cord ??

Much of your confusion exists because you do not either listen to or give any careful, reasoned thought to what someone says. As a result, you wind up conflating totally unrelated issues. For example, there is no field that is produced by a closed loop of current that is flowing in the center conductor and outer shield of a coaxial cable. That is a fact, whether you accept it or not, and that fact is proven mathematically in every textbook on electromagnetic theory. But that is only one very specific situation, and that's where the conflation comes in because you do not recognize that the radiation by a power cord that is next to coaxial interconnect cable and the susceptibility of the coaxial cable to that radiation is an entirely different and totally unrelated situation. Likewise, the possible sonic degradation that may be produced by a coaxial cable has no relevance whatsoever to the absurd contention that a cable tie disrupts the field around a coaxial cable which is provable to not be present,

 

[grindstone]

I guess I expected more commentary about the R-core iron. I know everything is soldered, but if you're in there again sometime and feel like jumping-in your old output iron for a listen, I'd appreciate a post. Thanks for the detailed updates and the thread.

 

[RtoR King]

RE: Tie Raps or (tyraps - electrical industry slang)

I the industry I work in we currently run hundreds, even thousands of coaxial cables carrying 3 to 12gbs, 800mv digital data streams. Some of the cables run over 300 feet. As the data stream is NRZI encoded, the analog FM frequency equivalent is half the bit rate or in this case 1.5 to 6ghz. And because of the frequencies at play, foam core coax cable must be used, these still are ANALOG signals for all practical purposes.

Here you need to be careful with tyraps. Too tight and it will induce an impedance mis-match which is clearly visible on test gear. Too many and the data signal gets corrupted beyond recovery. Also you don't space any wire tie or restriction evenly. This too can cause reflections.

Now what does this have to do with baseband audio cables - zip, nada, nothing, irrelevant, insignificant. Use all the tyraps you want inside an audio amp or neatening up your system cables. They make no sonic difference.

EE's and other electronics professionals understand why and apply this knowledge appropriately. They don't deserve to be called narrow minded and whatever else.

 

[drlowmu]

RE: Tie Raps or (tyraps - electrical industry slang)

I the industry I work in we currently run hundreds, even thousands of coaxial cables carrying 3 to 12gbs, 800mv digital data streams. Some of the cables run over 300 feet. As the data stream is NRZI encoded, the analog FM frequency equivalent is half the bit rate or in this case 1.5 to 6ghz. And because of the frequencies at play, foam core coax cable must be used, these still are ANALOG signals for all practical purposes.

Here you need to be careful with tyraps. Too tight and it will induce an impedance mis-match which is clearly visible on test gear. Too many and the data signal gets corrupted beyond recovery. Also you don't space any wire tie or restriction evenly. This too can cause reflections.

Now what does this have to do with baseband audio cables - zip, nada, nothing, irrelevant, insignificant. Use all the tyraps you want inside an audio amp or neatening up your system cables. They make no sonic difference.

EE's and other electronics professionals understand why and apply this knowledge appropriately. They don't deserve to be called narrow minded and whatever else.

 

[drlowmu]

Dear R to R King,

You have goofed up on tie wraps - unintentionally, but very badly. What you wrote, and what I consistently discover in the real world, are two totally different things !!

I have often removed tie wraps from ( high performance ) audio gear. Cut them off and throw them away. I separate the bundled wires so they are at least 1/8th an inch from each other, often done with coaxial cable.

Guess what, in every single instance, with decent equipment, the unit subjectively sounds 3 to 5% better, to all persons who hear / listen it !! For 40 years this has been going on. Forty years. Others, such as Mapleshade's Pierre Sprey nicely wrote this up on his web pages.

You are sadly hampered with, three basic problems, as I readily see it :

1) You are narrow minded from your " professional training ".

2) You do not think to LISTEN to things

3) LOL, you "believe" audio is narrow band. Nothing could be further from the truth, and it is screwing you up, ...........royally !!

Again, I am no techie, but I know to keep an open mind, and to listen to things.

Also, I KNOW very well, how to read people. ( I was able to pretty well figure you out, your apparent depth of audio knowledge, from the spoken content in your very first post in this DIY build thread .)

The specific words you used were " no difference, cost, electrolytic, and Orange Drop". It was simply all "I" needed to hear, to immediately evaluate you. I sensed you, and your audio knowledge / limitations immediately, and almost chucked to myself. I was looking for words like ..........." easily differentiate", best possible, " all-film caps" and "Mundorf Silver and Oil." And you were comparing things to a fabulous-sounding GTO, preposterously which you never ever have heard, zero experience. Read Boli46 in this thread.

So, how do "I" know audio is really wide band? Well, my first audio mentor, Robert W. Fulton, in the 1980s, used a 2 GHZ scope to study audio.

Many " professionals " and E.E. trained types, will scoff at that in 2022. I expect you will do that immediately. You think audio is narrow band.


Prior to the 1980s, Robert only had 500 mHZ scopes in his lab. One lovely day, visiting me in W.L.A., CA. he described to us all the need for this TEK 2 GIG scope, he actually had tears in his eyes, explaining the need for this piece of measuring equipment. I had never seen him cry, .... ever. After he got his new scope, I had numerous ( my usual ) telephone audio conversations with Robert ( mid 1980s ). I was designing and building the three chassis " Triode Music Amp " back then. Often times, Robert would bring up, with an air of child-like amazement in his voice " how much more he was seeing, of audio, with the 2 GIG scope. How valuable it was, to his understanding of audio." I read all of this experience as Robert Fulton being 100% sincere, and open. Some of the technical jargon used were things like " heterodynes, combinations, overtones, and resultants coming down into the audible band ".

You repeatedly infer that audio is narrow banded. I would fully believe Mr. Fulton, who studied audio at 2 GHZ, before I would ever consider you .

Narrow Mindedness due to Training : Did you know that Thomas Edison 's favorite employees were young boys, prior to going to High School. He got his best work, and patentable ideas, from them !!

I had my first stereo after college, in 1968. I learned back then, immediately, that my McIntosh C-22 12AX7 preamp, and Dynaco ST-70 power amp, sounded different , depending upon how the AC plugs were orientated in the wall. 1968 was 54 years ago, I discovered this. However, in 2022, HERE on HFV, in this thread, we have two individuals, one an " audio professional " and the other with a BSEE and a PhD degree, telling us all that there is no difference in a power plug's AC polarity. My goodness, you two incorrect trollers, do not even know how to plug audio equipment into the wall.

The truth will set you free.

Jeff.

One other point. Post #252 by you : You and Dr. Gary express yourselves uniquely and differently If we read Post #252 a couple times, it is hard for me imagine, those are your actual words, in 95% of the post. They read JUST like Dr.Gary writes and speaks. People here can discern who is who. I have known Gary for 40 years. I don't want to put you on the spot, by asking whose words they are. I think you made a mistake to do that, BOTH of you.

Anyone with a modicum of intuition, would say it is Gary writing, with you posting under your Moniker and your name. I am sure thatv IF it is so, it is not legitimate and ethical to do, or within HFV Forum rules. I wonder, if you two were in cahoots, and if one of you was performing in Post #252, as a shill, for the other. Only respond, if my suspicions are incorrect. You would tell the truth.

The truth will set you free. His truth goes marching on.

Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

Don't bother with replies from " Armchair Audiophiles". It does not mean anything.

Just for the record, please be advised that this "Airmchair Audiophile" knew Bob Fulton and was selling his speakers, interconnects, head shell leads and speaker cables long before your wannabe guru ever met him. Also, back in the early 1980s, I was having weekly phone discussions with John Tuttle during the entire development of the dual-mono version of the Bravura preamp, and I had pre-production circuit board up and running and installed in my system long before your wannabe guru was even aware of its existence. In fact I still have the experimental prototype circuit board that John Tuttle used during the development of the dual-mono Bravura. Let me know if you would like me to post a picture,

 

[drlowmu]

RtoR King:

Has anyone noticed ........your answers in Post #307, to my questions in Post #306, are incomplete and sorely lacking.

You have not lied, thank goodness, but you have obfuscated answering my questions. Why? Simple. Because they expose you, make you look like the person with incomplete experience and knowledge in audio, practical audio, that you most assuredly and certainly are !!! You are dealing in audio with only "half a deck of cards", and you need to to quit posting your nonsense and untruths, as it confuses the readers of this, my thread.

To wit:

1) You have never come up with addressing and answering how, for forty years, I have been removing tie wraps from wiring, including coaxial cables found in amps and preamps, separating the wires by 1/8th an inch or so, and getting better fidelity, every time. You contend that audio is narrow band, and there will be no difference audible. I find, not true at all, there is always a slight audible improvement.

2) You contend that audio is narrow band, and I say you are 100% wrong on this - also!! You have no way to address how, my first audio mentor in the 1980s, was purchasing and using 2 GIG Tektronics scopes, to study audio. That was strike two, against you !!!

3) Strike three - to expose you, is how you answered ( or obfuscated answering ) my questions about you Shilling for Dr.Gary, in your post #252.

LOL, you answered like so :

" And no, my posts are my posts period. ".

Good boy, you did not lie there. No one in this world can deny the logic of that answer, that statement. But it did not address my questioning.

The word " period" denotes you prefer not to talk about it any more.

Is that because, if we do, it will possibly expose you and Dr.Gary in an unfavorable way? I suspect so. ( Perhaps and likely, you two trollers colluded, and you acted as the shill, in your HFV Post #252?? if so, you did this against all known moral decency, personal integrity, and Forum rules . )

How come, RtoR King, you were not able to answer the HEART of my question regarding Post #252 ??

Were those words you posted in HFV Post #252, Dr.Gary's words? Or, were they truly 100% your thoughts and your own verbiage, precisely ? I am not asking if you agree with what was written, I am only trying to discover whose words are they ?? It certainly looks to me, as though it was written almost 100% verbatim, by the Gary Sokolich posting in this thread. It LACKS your personal straightforward writing style.

What is the truth here, we would like you , and perhaps even Dr. Gary, to respond to my questioning on Post # 252. Were you RtoR King, acting as the shill there ??

I have spent two days, messing with you two completely-uninformed-about-audio people. It has taken me away, from working and reporting on Audio Chassis #2s full development. I hope to be able to spend less wasted time now, with you two sadly unqualified thread trollers, .....and get back to work. Three strikes and you are out.

Have a good day and a good life. You are welcome to respond to me privately with HFV 's PM system. I prefer you cease posing up here, as you confuse the average hi fi enthusiast, and it degrades the DIY amp build I am trying to show everyone.

Thanks a lot,

Jeff Medwin

 

[RtoR King]

Mr. LowMu:

1) I gave a very good example of how tyraps can be a problem in some RF applications causing impedance bumps in foam core cable. I also pointed out that this is not an issue at audio frequencies. In a previous post I explained how a magnetic field attenuates with the square of the distance and one needs to figure that into a "tyrap quandary". And I acknowledged some ridiculous hypothetical audio practices where tyraps would cause a crosstalk problem.

What more do you want in terms of a response? No, I can't explain and address what you think you hear. Only you can try to explain that.

2) The audio band has been thoroughly and consistently documented as from 20hz to 20,000hz for the past 100 years. I also noted in another post here that you do need 5x the highest frequency in a measuring device (scope) to properly an analyze a square wave or rise time. That would be 100khz. I don't care what one single audio enthusiast thought he needed a 2ghz scope for. If Mr. Fulton was indeed a credible engineer, you must have grossly misunderstood what he was doing with that scope. Or perhaps overlooked that fact that a 2ghz scope can work on audio frequencies but is not required, I own a Tektronix 500mhz 2Gbs digital scope. I use it for audio as well. But I don't claim you need a scope of that caliber for just audio work. I do more than just audio.

3) I have told you that post 252 is my writing and my submission. That is the truth and I resent being accused of otherwise TWICE now. That borders on the very behavior that I understand has gotten you banned on almost all other audio forums. Furthermore you are hyper focused on who you think wrote it but ignore what others have acknowledged is some good advice for you.

If anyone is confusing the non-technical readers of this thread it is you with this placebo driven narcissistic behavior. I have the entire electronics community to evaluate my statements and determine if I am qualified to speaks on these subjects. Who do you have behind you?

No, as a service to others here I will comment here on things I think are wrong and they are free to decide what is right. But I will not relentlessly try to force my ideas down their throats post after post. That I do promise.

 

[Dr.Gary]

Mr. LowMu:

1) I gave a very good example of how tyraps can be a problem in some RF applications causing impedance bumps in foam core cable. I also pointed out that this is not an issue at audio frequencies. In a previous post I explained how a magnetic field attenuates with the square of the distance and one needs to figure that into a "tyrap quandary". And I acknowledged some ridiculous hypothetical audio practices where tyraps would cause a crosstalk problem.

What more do you want in terms of a response? No, I can't explain and address what you think you hear. Only you can try to explain that.

2) The audio band has been thoroughly and consistently documented as from 20hz to 20,000hz for the past 100 years. I also noted in another post here that you do need 5x the highest frequency in a measuring device (scope) to properly an analyze a square wave or rise time. That would be 100khz. I don't care what one single audio enthusiast thought he needed a 2ghz scope for. If Mr. Fulton was indeed a credible engineer, you must have grossly misunderstood what he was doing with that scope. Or perhaps overlooked that fact that a 2ghz scope can work on audio frequencies but is not required, I own a Tektronix 500mhz 2Gbs digital scope. I use it for audio as well. But I don't claim you need a scope of that caliber for just audio work. I do more than just audio.

3) I have told you that post 252 is my writing and my submission. That is the truth and I resent being accused of otherwise TWICE now. That borders on the very behavior that I understand has gotten you banned on almost all other audio forums. Furthermore you are hyper focused on who you think wrote it but ignore what others have acknowledged is some good advice for you.

If anyone is confusing the non-technical readers of this thread it is you with this placebo driven narcissistic behavior. I have the entire electronics community to evaluate my statements and determine if I am qualified to speaks on these subjects. Who do you have behind you?

No, as a service to others here I will comment here on things I think are wrong and they are free to decide what is right. But I will not relentlessly try to force my ideas down their throats post after post. That I do promise.

Back in the early 1980s I had many phone discussions with Bob Fultoin. Most of them were to obtain his opinions and recommendations regarding amps, preamps, tone arms etc. However, I would occasionally ask him a technical question and more often than not I found the depth of his understanding quite limited. Because he was always polite and did not engage in pontificating, I never pressed him when it was clear that he had reached the limit of his understanding, Even when he said something that I knew waa grossly incorrect, I ended that aspect of the discussion and moved on to something else. Even though Bob Fulton never volunteered information about his testing, and I never asked, I suspect that he would have to be using 2GHz scope to investigate the time-domain characteristics of the different types capacitors that he regularly used to bypass everything in sight. Something like an HP3585A analyzer, which is capable of making impedance measurements on capacitors out to 40MHz and which I frequently use for that purpose, would in the early1980s have been beyond his ability to purchase. Thanks to eBay, it is now possible to pick one up that fully functional for under $1000.

 

[drlowmu]

No need to waste too much of our time here today.

We have gotten responses, suppositions and hypotheses, from each of the two smart Electronics professionals.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Always remember this, because someone has an E.E. background, does not mean they know how to do audio well,....

No one reading this thread, has an INKLING of what sort of systems ( audio home hi fi systems ) these guys are running. Do you ????

I would suggest to NOT judge an audio Forum posting enthusiast, by their electronics knowledge alone..

Instead, I would observe what sort of home hi fi they actually have - previously and presently.

How well was their equipment set up ? I would judge a person's audio knowledge, on what I saw set up and by what I may have heard, during a preview at their premises.

We have the same situation - at play here.

It is best confuse one type of knowledge, with another.


Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

No need to waste too much of our time here today.

We have gotten responses, suppositions and hypotheses, from each of the two smart Electronics professionals.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Always remember this, because someone has an E.E. background, does not mean they know how to do audio well,....

No one reading this thread, has any INKLING of what sort of systems ( audio home hi fi systems ) these guys are running. Do you ????

I would suggest to NOT judge an audio Forum posting enthusiast, by their electronics knowledge alone..

Instead, I would observe what sort of home hi fi they actually have - previously and presently.

How well was their equipment set up ? I would judge a person's audio knowledge, on what I saw set up and by what I may have heard, during a preview at their premises.

We have is the same situation - at play here.

Do not confuse one type of knowledge, with another.


Jeff

No suppositions. No hypotheses. Just facts that are documented and supported by nearly a century of accumulated knowledge in science, mathematics, physics and engineering. That said, you may well have the best sounding and most accurate amplifier in existence on this planet. If so, good for you. Just stick to describing your build and how great it sounds to you, and refrain from speculating and pontificating on the technical factors that you think and would like to believe are responsible for sonic performance that your build provides.

 

[drlowmu]

In view of the history of the ringmaster, did you really expect a different outome?

Baloney Gary,

My history up here has been decent , ever since I started on HFV, about 14 Months ago.

As of today, I have received 505 responses, as follows :

486 LIKES
4 LOVES
14 HA HAs
1 ANGRY

HFV has been a lovely fresh start, to join and post here. Also, to meet and help - out Hari Iyer of Thane, India, who solicited me last year for his first - ever DIY tube amp build. He seems happy with the result. ( 1/2 a 6FQ7, DCed into a KT88, zero negative feedback, KT88 run as a tetrode ).

I have tried to do my best in communicating straight, and in particular, not to come across as an ugly American.

Jeff

 

[drlowmu]

As you well know, I wasn't referring to your history here. I was referring to your well-documented history in a multitude of other audio forums on the Internet in which you are no longer able to participate.

Yes, of course. You will try to always paint me in a negative way, and I will naturally try to do the opposite.

And look at the final exchange with the Klipsch Moderator that you took the trouble to look up and post here.

I told him, my ( then-new ) 2019 SE DC KT88 amp was probably ( then ) the best sounding tube amp in the world. I told him, " you have not heard it to know this", but I have evaluated here in my home, and by taking a 3,400 mile trip to Montana and back. " If he heard it , he would understand " I explained to him. ( In Montana Gary, my 2019 amp with 40 dollar E.H. KT88s "took out " a pair of $19K 2A3 amps, running AVVT Mesh Plate 2A3s, which might fetch $3K a pair today, if NOS ". No contest between the amps IMHO, and to others attending. ) With that exchange you posted ( not in my behalf ) , the Moderator closed the thread because " I was arrogant " ( without evaluating the LOVELY amp !!! ) , cancelled me, and wished me well.

But out of spite, he pulled ALL my thread's documentation off the Forum. I do not recall the number of posts in the thread, but it had received over 230,000 views as I recall.

I was trying to leave the information in the non profit public domain, to have more DIY people build such amps for themselves, long after I am gone. I do feel SE, only two tube stages, and DC is really is the very best tube amp topology, but then I would be pontificating , even if I am sure - it is so.

Lesson learned, people do not believe you when you tell them what I did. They get either defensive or angry with me. Even if I honestly feel the amp is the best I have ever personally heard...... and.......ahem, maybe in all of tube audio.

I get that same human reaction, on every Forum wherein I have posted. But again, I am not in the audio business, and none of the people have heard my amps, except close local friends who may have visited..

Those huge three-chassis mono " Triode Music Amps" I designed and built it for myself ( six chassis for stereo ) in 1982-1985,..... less than ten people ever heard it . They will talk highly of it, to this day .

Gee Gary, each mono amp back then had three power supplies , each L1/C1/L2/C2, 24 ohm chokes, and three separate double actively regulated by solid state B+es, feeding 12 !!! 6SN7GTBs, and six 6B4Gs per amp, in A1 P-P-P. Zero NFB.

As good as it was, the Fulton Premiere speakers were too inefficient for the amp. A mis-match, after all that work. I learned a lot - doing that first design. ( That is why I recommend to friends to start with high efficiency vintage ALTEC speakers these days. )

I have used this post of yours, and have diverged a lot, and to explain to you and others, how to understand me - and from where I come from. This has been an interesting, encompassing experience for me. Tube amps for audio, as good as I can make them for myself.

Thanks for allowing me to bend your ear. Back to Chassis #2 now.

Jeff

 

[drlowmu]

His Post #221.

From Gary :

" No suppositions. No hypotheses. Just facts that are documented and supported by nearly a century of accumulated knowledge in science, mathematics, physics and engineering. That said, you may well have the best sounding and most accurate amplifier in existence on this planet. If so, good for you. Just stick to describing your build and how great it sounds to you, and refrain from speculating and pontificating on the technical factors that you think and would like to believe are responsible for sonic performance that your build provides."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- -

As I lay in bed this morning, thinking, I have decided that Gary is ALL WRONG to be posting up here, and has NO ROOM and NO business to be constantly hounding and trolling !!! R to R King also, with Orange Drops and electrolytics, and cost containment, he is mid fi from his first posting in my own personal opinion.

Gary has a BSEE degree, from about 50 years ago, and a PhD. . To my knowledge, since I have known him,( about four decades ) he has never had a Hi Fi system that used a tube amp. I am pretty sure he has never designed and actually built a single tube audio amp, for USE in his home hi fi system.

So, while some non - amp builders may be "snowed" by RtoR King and Gary's logic of peer review, 100 years of science, physics, and textbook learning, to all of their " justification", I say......... BALONEY.

" The proof of the pudding is in the eating. "

To all of their "justifications" ( theoretical ) I can counter and proudly say, in the past 100 years, no one in tube audio ever has come close to building the unique circuit openly presented here - AND Gary and RtoR King can not " muzzle " me, because of their electronics ( not audio ) knowledge.

Listen up , this is to the best of my knowledge :

Has anyone we know of ( other than me or my audio mentor, Dennis Fraker ) , ever single or double shunted the B+ to an audio amps critical audio stages ? NO !!

I have never seen any schematic, where it was done, for the reasons, and the ways shown here. ( IF one schematic exists, fine. ) But I am very SURE no one in audio has ever posted a schematic ( like mine on page one ) showing DOUBLE SERIES SHUNTING. And I am even more sure, that NO ONE has done DOUBLE SERIES SHUNTING to TWO B+ feeds, for a single channel's most critical signal areas, as shown on page one, etc ...

If the power supply in an tube amp is important, ( it is !!! ) might that create a superior end - result, VS : how every one else's tube amp is presently built and operating ?????

Wait a minute, wait a minute, it gets a HECK of a lot better, than the above.

( The above is only part of the message today. )

Besides double series shunting to the two most critical areas in the amp, my amplifier also applies "DF FFs" to those exact same circuit locations. DF FF stands for a proprietary " Dennis Fraker Final Filter " , positioned beneficially right AT the point of use.

It has already been described, and plenty of photos I placed in this thread, openly showing the parts employed. This local / at the point of use Final Filter consists of a " C/L1/C1/L2/C2. " ALL high quality film caps, ( LOL, not RtoR Kings "mid-fi" cheap electrolytics ). All the three capacitor positions ( C, C1, C2 ) are also MULTIPLE film cap bypassed, which very few people in audio know how to properly do. My audio mentor, Mr. Dennis Fraker, is the single / best individual I have seen, at multiple film cap bypassing,........ he's a true artist. !!

Gary will not muzzle me from describing reasons WHY my amp is well designed and sounds superb to me. He seems to me to have close to zero tube amp experience, in designing and building !! Remember that please, when you see him trolling inside this thread. He is unqualified in audio, not in electronics, to be here.

I think, to verify my own observations and opinions, I simply need to take the first chassis #1 amp OUT of my apartment , and A-B it on other high efficiency systems, versus other known amps.

I have a trusted audio friend in Kansas City , who owns and lives in a huge 1911-built Fire House. ( In 1911, the fire fighting equipment were horse-drawn, so his building got decommissioned, and he purchased it !! ) LOTS of room, but a fire TRUCK, can't get through the front doors.. He has lots of ALTEC speakers ( hooray ). I will ask him, if he is willing to do some listening and A-Bing, to this thread's new 6005 amp.

As I recall, from my single visit there last year, he had then a fancy high end Japanese looking ( ?? ) 300B amplifier, and a fancy newer high dollar German Thoress Type 845 triode amp, that we guys can use, to do some amplifier comparisons. I'd like to A-B the new 6005 SE DC amp ...............VS both of his tube amps.

I have emailed him today-earlier, suggesting a listening evaluation, between the both of us two audio nuts. I will need to break in the first 6005 amp, for 50 more hours. ( easy, a CD player on repeat, and 10 Ohm Power resistors across the Cardas CCGR speaker posts, and cycle the amp on and off, for three days or so...a silent break in ).

Some more : There is no one, in all of tube audio, doing what my mentor and I do in tube amp design. That is the truth, the honest truth. Is that speaking wrong?? Pontificating? Arrogant ?? Overstating ?? I am sorry about that folks. I speak the truth. I have explained clearly above, what we do different , but only SOME of the things.

One other example here, my mentor and I are likely the first persons in audio to operate a tetrode 6005 output tube with zero negative feedback. That fact will drive traditional EEs wild to contemplate. But...... just simply LISTEN to it in operation, in the circuit !!!

If Gary does not appreciate my truthful circuit explanations, he should stop trolling and start to learn how to build a tube amp. Visit me and A-B it against my recent builds, on my system. Gary has used as amplifiers : for about 40 years, a Harmon Kardon 430 solid state receiver, and, as of a month or two ago, a 1970s GAS ( Great American Sound ) Ampzilla 500 ( designed by " Bongo", the late Jim Bonjourno ). on Nestrovic ( spelling ) inefficient speakers. I wonder if the HK430 was plugged into the wall properly ?? And his Bravura solid state early IC preamp. ??

I hope to get my Kansas City audio friend to agree to do this newly proposed Fire House A-B amplifier comparison session.

Listening, and not someone's theory, formal education, and such, is what matters the most. Please stay tuned.

Thanks, for allowing me to speak,

Jeff