Posted by RC Daniel [ 58.106.35.35 ] on September 23, 2007 at 17:35:53:
In Reply to: Re: Why SE in SET amps? posted by granch on September 22, 2007 at 00:35:26:
>>>A very well designed amp with feedback run well within its ratings (both bandwidth and power) can be the nearest thing to linear that I know of.
<<<
And yet many people prefer the way non-feedback designs, both SETs and PP triode amplifiers, present music.
Perhaps the examination of a narrow range of measurable characteristics fails to tell the full picture. It seems you are trying to broaden the characteristics discussed, though I think our (measurable) understanding of music reproduction is still rather limited and is not adequately capable of describing the performance of our systems.
Measurements - especially in research - are essential, though no less limited in-the-now simply because of it. Add in psychoacoustics; personal preferences; people's wants and needs WRT their audio / music 'hobby'; system contexts et al. and you end up with a difficult to measure / understand 'system' (for want of a better word). I am getting off track, and am sure you know this stuff, but it is worth repeating here.
Then there are sooo many perspectives one can take in tackling the 'argument'. For example, we can get caught using measures that may suggest why SET amps should be inferior, yet fail to examine what makes them a viable amplification tool for some. What was the original question?
That said, perhaps I am speaking through my hat; my skills relate to health science, not audio research or engineering, and I generally don't call on my scientific mind (cough, splutter, choke) when indulging myself in the writing of these posts. As a music-lover that wants a system that can reproduce the aspects of music that press-my-buttons, I just don't think about the science of audio - with lots of listening my auditory, visual, and limbic systems in conjunction with some simple reasoning should tell me what I need to know (and feel).
Keep well
Raymond
[ SET Forum ] [ Help ]