"Amp designs with push-pull or balanced topologies can achieve lower overall levels of distortion than single ended amps.

==The author (?) throw in balanced, but I don't understand how that benefits the distortion argument. The author jumps around a bit and creates as much confusion as he tries to clear. Further....

>>On the other hand, they achieve this overall distortion reduction chiefly by canceling out even order (2nd, 4th, etc.) distortion byproducts, which leaves behind a disproportionate share of odd order (3rd, 5th, etc.) distortion byproducts. "

==I don't see how this makes a case for either topology. I read the entire page and it's fairly rudimentary as far as describing various topologies. About the most meaningful statement is this,

"There are many schools of thought about distortion byproducts, with various psychoacoustic theories to support each"

and this...

"There are only a few exceptions, and these single ended amps deserve special praise for bringing overall distortion problems down to acceptable levels (though still detectable, and still higher than push-pull or balanced designs)".

>>In reality it makes no sense to me to argue topology. Fine examples of all kinds are out there. I am lucky to own several excellent kinds of every type of amp including SS and hybrids, otl and SE as well as arguably the worlds finest Pp-otl, the Berning 270. I also have a fine SE in the electronluv, I do prefer odd order distortions BTW. I have heard Lynn Olsens Aurora on my speakers and Paul Weitzels new SS amp, the Firstwatt, and my old Bogen PP. I really liked them all. But when it comes to my money of course SE wins, ultimately. It just sounds better, on my system/room.

To me it makes alot more sense to raise points about tangibles, like craftsmanship, implementations, parts quality and overall design. And what about overall system tuning and synergy between components like manualblock suggests????

Throwing an argumentive bomb to a forum is audio delinquency.

Manualblock makes sense with this regarding various topology debate:

====I have always thought this would be an important part of design theory except that the debate gets too silly with people re-stating the obvious ad nauseum. Or defending their point of veiw or their equipment like there was something at stake that reflects on them as people instead of just helping to advance the cause of better sound for the home stereo.
Or they have some odd or difficult to drive speakers that only sound good with one type of tube or something equally silly.
So when someone is genuinely interested in the musically relevant distinctions between the two circuit types it is side-tracked with all that nonsense.
Just an observation why there can't seem to be a rational dialogue.

>>Well said.

TC