Tom,
It was not intended as an insult, I thought there was room for some humour
every now and then. Albert Einstein was not my friend and I thought that
would shine through in the message. I appologise if you feel offended.
I do get your point regarding the circuit but the point we are trying to
make is that despite the fact that you and others try to tell us it doesn't
work it does work. WITH respectable IMD, the measurements that were carried
out is proof of this. I think we have done far more extensive testing of
these amplifiers than many others have done with their homebrew stuff. Far
more..
Maybe we should not call our amps "DAF amps" as they are somewhat different
as we use diodes and not tubes to generate screen voltage. Furthermore we
use a different tube in the amplifier. We have said that the design might
not be repeatable with every type of tube but with these ones (QBL5-3500)
for sure it is.
In that regard this design is not different from other designs, there are
some tubes that don't work well or aren't suited for GG for example. Then
they should not be used in GG, of course. We're just trying to get across
that under certain conditons the "DAF derivative" circuit can be used with
a tube suited for it. That's it.
Mr DAF might very well have the wrong numbers in his article, I will not
and have not contested you on that as you are much more capable to check
them out than me. But that is another story.
So, in the future I will not include any humorous or sarcastic remarks as
we must be strictly scientific here. Good point.... :-|
73/Peter SM2CEW
www.qsl.net/sm2cew
At 11:05 2000-10-28 , you wrote:
>> I would like to add the following statement from a good friend of mine:
>>
>> "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
>> minds." - Albert Einstein
>>
>> Albert was right, look at the opposition we SM's get for rejuvenating an
>> old design that has merits.
>>
>> /Mr Peter, SM2CEW
>
>
>Hi Peter,
>
>You and your friend miss the entire point of what I am saying.
>
>You seem to feel the circuit is well designed, and has some merits
>that exceed it's potential for problems, but that just isn't true.
>
>Insulting others, because they point out a few technical facts,
>doesn't make your favorite circuit become a good design. The fact
>is, before you and your friend lifted my statements from context, is
>G2DAF himself has some technical gaffs in his article. Some of his
>numbers don't agree with themselves.
>
>You may take this as a personal insult against your mother if you
>like, but the fact remains that circuit does about everything you are
>not supposed to do with a linear PA. If one or two work, that's fine
>with me. But it is not a good design. Because one or two of
>something can be made to work doesn't prove it is a repeatable
>design, or a good design.
>73, Tom W8JI
>w8ji@contesting.com
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|