The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Phil Allison"
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <3DKC9.467$Lq.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Class B amplifiers: what are the large low-value resistors for?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 11:02:29 +1100
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:52:20 EST
Organization: Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
"N. Thornton" wrote in message
> "Kevin Aylward" wrote in message
> > Phil Allison wrote:
> > >> I meant *real amplifiers*:-)
> > > ** You know what that is do you ? I doubt it.
> > Oh...I think so.
> Here we go...
** You bet, the audio looney club is in session.
> > > It sounds like a right silly idea, probably
> > >> because it was done 30 years ago when they didn't know any better.
> > >
> > > ** No arrogance is beyond you is it ?
> > It is a daft idea to have no bias (quad dumper and such like excluded).
> > I am sorry if you consider this arrogance. If it were a good idea, it
> > would be done more often. Essentially, it is never done. I agree that no
> > bias saves the manual pot setting, but this is something better lived
> > with than having the outputs cut-off.
> There are always niches for these sort of things. My unbiased amp
> certainly did the job nicely. But never would I expect you to agree.
> > > I
> > >> still remember using 100 watt transistor amp modules that used a
> > >> driver transformer because the designers were too daft to realise
> > >> that the product did not have any glass in it.
> > >
> > > ** Unlike yourself no doubt who has too many glasses in him.
> > Look, we all make silly mistakes in our lives, pretending otherwise is
> > just as daft. Some tube designers of the past moving into transistor
> > design simply could not get their act together. They took approaches
> > which had no technical justification at the time.
> I think you'll find there were reasons for what they did. Now parts
> have very different costs, expectations are different, and technical
> knowledge has moved on a whole lot from 30 years ago.
> And it should be obvious that arguing with Phil is going to go
** Not if you expect to win with non facts and BS as is your normal
style Mr Thornton.
> If you don't agree with him you will be ad hominemmed and
> non-sequitured to death.
** Still smarting over the fake Motorola powere transistors issue?
You really got way out of your depth in that one.
>And if that doesn't work, who knows, you might even be accused of something
suspect. I wouldn't bother.
** Suspect ? You ? Never. Nothing could be more certain than how
loopey you are.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup