Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Tube\s+Standardization\s+\[Was\]\s+Stability\s+of\s+amps\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Tube\s+Standardization\s+\[Was\]\s+Stability\s+of\s+amps\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Tube Standardization [Was] Stability of amps (score: 1): Author: kd4e <doc@kd4e.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:11:40 -0500; This is an interesting topic, isn't it true that 6146's varied within some of the series - the "B" in particular, or was it the "A"? It is also a problem with many modern devices where a manufacturer; /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00288.html (9,236 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Tube Standardization [Was] Stability of amps (score: 1): Author: john.brewer@us.schneider-electric.com; Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:35:00 -0400; Indeed so, Doc, but at least there's a spec difference between the original and A and B variants....hehehe Cheers John kd4e <doc@kd4e.com> 09/25/2007 02:11 PM To john.brewer@us.schneider-electric.com; /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00290.html (10,869 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Tube Standardization [Was] Stability of amps (score: 1): Author: kd4e <doc@kd4e.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:22:55 -0500; Yes, but it remains odd and predictably troublesome that they altered specs but not the tube nomenclature. Instead of multiple variants of 6146A why not 6146C or D or something else? The boatanchor l; /archives//html/Amps/2007-09/msg00291.html (8,747 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]