> "Any decent commercial amp will do more than its advertised at. Its called
> overhead and allows for tube aging."
>
> I wish to respectfully disagree with at least part of this statement. Let
> us assume an amplifier has what is considered good distortion levels at an
> output of 1,000 watts, but can actually put out 1250 watts. This extra
> 250
> watts is not overhead and does not allow for tube aging. If the emission
> of
> the tube decreases, that extra 250 watts is not a cushion, because the
> distortion level at the 1,000 watt level will increase as the tube ages,
> because the tube is approaching the non-linear region. As the tube
> emission
> drops, the undistorted power output will decrease, and the point at which
> the level becomes unacceptable will continue to be below the maximum
> power.
Yes, distortion will degrade but is it still acceptable? Remember the old
"Garbage in garbage out" principle that was initially referring to very
early computer programming. If a tube degrades by "nn"dB but is still above
the crud out of most xcvrs or even worse most bricks, whats the problem?
Tom clearly made that point yesterday but obviously some missed it.
Instead of arguing theory about a single device try looking at the system
level.
Carl
KM1H
>
> Some amplifiers that are advertised at 1,500 watts output will actually
> put
> out a low distortion output greater than that. That is overhead and would
> allow for tube aging. I have no problem with that.
>
> Whether or not I am an expert has nothing to do with a philosophy of how
> an
> amplifier is rated.
>
> Colin K7FM
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|