Lou, neither of us has ever said or even hinted that there are not better tubes
for 6M. What the tiny minority of naysayers miss entirely is that the SB-200 is
the best bang for the buck on the planet and that no voodo is required for
putting it on 6M with a completly stable, neutralized and clean signal.
This thread has given me a few laughs but I think it is time to put it to bed.
Ive no further interest in trying to convince that very tiny minority. Too much
time wasted for no further return on the curve that has "flat lined".
Carl
KM1H
----- Original Message -----
From: Gudguyham@aol.com
To: w8ji@contesting.com ; k7fm@teleport.com ; km1h@jeremy.mv.com ;
g3rzp@g3rzp.wanadoo.co.uk ; amps@contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] stability of amps
In a message dated 9/25/2007 11:59:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
w8ji@contesting.com writes:
Looking at the issue pragmatically, if Carl and Lou are
> converting amplifiers that satisfy their customers, isn't
> that good enough? Perhaps the debate about whether or not
> it is good engineering is no longer relevant.
Of course, and everyone agrees on that point.
I maintain that I use sound design techniques in my conversions and NO voodo
magic. I'll agree there are better tubes for 6 meters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|