Quad II-80 cascodes
Ian Iveson
pentodes.
Thoughts?
Ian
Patrick Turner
Where is the schematic?
I don't like cascodes in power amplifiers.
Patrick Turner
Phil Allison
"Ian Iveson"
>
>I gather the Quad II-80 has substituted cascodes for the pentodes.
>
> Thoughts?
** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-amp.jpg
I what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
BTW
It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
...... Phil
Andre Jute
> ** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
>
> http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-...
>
> I what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
>
> BTW
>
> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>
> Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
>
> ...... Phil
What do you think of extending the range of amplifiers on the
"classic" QUAD II case, Phil?
Andre Jute
Patrick Turner
I realise you have asked Phil about the Q80
but allow me to say its a prudent move imho
by Quad bearing in mind the sensitivity of the
speakers made by Quad, and other people who might find 40 watts a
little too little.
Having the ability for 80 watts class AB means that there will be a
truly
wide sweetzone of initial pure class A and owners need not worry that
the
tube bias current is quite low.
So the output tubes tend to last well.
In my 8585 amp 35mA is plenty at idle with Ea at 470V.
I do hope Quad's method of biasing is better than most other brand
names.
I don't see any bias adjust pots or LED bias current indicators on the
picture of the
prototype. Without individual biasing if the bias is fixed and active
protection circuitry
there is a terribly common tendency for tubes to drift apart and cause
smoke and damage.
I get fed up with having to revise the crummy design practices of major
and minor
amp makers.
Quad should have got around to Q40, Q80 50 years ago but solid state
interupted development.
Patrick Turner.
Phil Allison
"Andre Jute"
"Phil Allison"
>
>> ** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
>>
>> http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-...
>>
>>
>> BTW
>>
>> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>>
>> Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
>>
>
> "classic" QUAD II case, Phil?
>
** Andre's cute, sharply directed question lacks proper context.
Nor is his purpose made one tiny bit clear.
Smacks of an invitation from a clown to play the fool.
So i'm not bloody doings.
BTW:
Quad is nowadays entirely owned by a Chinese marketing consortium.
Confucius say:
He who quite legally exploits another's long held good reputation to do
wrong, has negotiated a most excellent bargain with Satan.
Funny how there is no # 666 model yet in sight .......
...... Phil
Andre Jute
> "Andre Jute"
> "Phil Allison"
>
> >> ** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
>
> >>http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-...
>
> >> I see what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
>
> >> BTW
>
> >> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>
> >> Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
>
> > What do you think of extending the range of amplifiers on the
> > "classic" QUAD II case, Phil?
>
> ** Andre's cute, sharply directed question lacks proper context.
I was thinking about aesthetics and marketing, and the value of the
QUAD II style case being reserved for the smaller amp. Exactly the
point you make below in your remark about a Chinese saying.
> Nor is his purpose made one tiny bit clear.
Perfect clarity is for those with agendas they wish to hide.
> Smacks of an invitation from a clown to play the fool.
>
> So i'm not bloody doings.
If you aren't paranoid, why are you doing high voltage electronics? --
question every newbie should think about seriously.
> BTW:
>
> Quad is nowadays entirely owned by a Chinese marketing consortium.
I'm just wondering whether so far they haven't done well by the
revered name. Looking at current ESL, in essence they are just
developments and extensions of the range as it was under Peter Walker.
> Confucius say:
>
> He who quite legally exploits another's long held good reputation to do
> wrong, has negotiated a most excellent bargain with Satan.
That answers my question about what you think of the retro styling of
the new QUAD tube amp.
> Funny how there is no # 666 model yet in sight .......
What was wrong with the 666 model -- or is that the Devil's signature
tune? (My Quad SS amp is an ex-BBC 405 Mk2; I have little experience
of the later models.)
> ...... Phil
Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review
Andre Jute
> Andre Jute wrote:
>
> > On Dec 10, 11:04 am, "Phil Allison" <philalli...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > ** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
>
> > >http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-...
>
> > > I what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
>
> > > BTW
>
> > > It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>
> > > Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
>
> > > ...... Phil
>
> > What do you think of extending the range of amplifiers on the
> > "classic" QUAD II case, Phil?
>
> > Andre Jute
>
> I realise you have asked Phil about the Q80
> but allow me to say its a prudent move imho
> by Quad bearing in mind the sensitivity of the
> speakers made by Quad, and other people who might find 40 watts a
> little too little.
Quads are for music lovers, not headbangers. Or am I behind the times
here?
I find 25W more than enough to drive ESL63.
But actually my question to Phil, on which he picked up, was on the
brand imae of the Quad II box style being transferred to the each new
tube amp. That's a separate question from the gubbins of the amp.
> Having the ability for 80 watts class AB means that there will be a
> truly
> wide sweetzone of initial pure class A and owners need not worry that
> the
> tube bias current is quite low.
> So the output tubes tend to last well.
> In my 8585 amp 35mA is plenty at idle with Ea at 470V.
Nothing will ever last as long as the original KT66 in the original
QUAD II.
> I do hope Quad's method of biasing is better than most other brand
> names.
> I don't see any bias adjust pots or LED bias current indicators on the
> picture of the
> prototype. Without individual biasing if the bias is fixed and active
> protection circuitry
> there is a terribly common tendency for tubes to drift apart and cause
> smoke and damage.
>
> I get fed up with having to revise the crummy design practices of major
> and minor
> amp makers.
>
> Quad should have got around to Q40, Q80 50 years ago but solid state
> interupted development.
I don't actually agree that all the silicon Quad amps were
interruptions. I appreciate the easy-listening sound and decade-
ranging reliability of the QUAD 405 Mk2.
> Patrick Turner.
Ian Iveson
> http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-amp.jpg
Gone :(
>
> I what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
>
Yup
> BTW
>
> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
Whatever.
> Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
Pounds, even.
I saw a pic in the newsagents, which is where I found the
claim that it uses cascodes, in a magazine.
I guess Tim de P couldn't make too many changes or it
wouldn't be a Quad II, one feature of which is a single
stage comprising two pentodes. Six triodes suggests two
cascodes and a pair of drivers, which seems like cheating to
me. Also I noticed that separate cathode resistors are used
for each KT88.
So anyway, I wonder how he has arranged the top cathodes,
considering the original Quad just coupled the screens.
If anyone can find a circuit, it would be appreciated.
Ian
Phil Allison
"Ian Iveson"
>> BTW
>>
>> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>
> Whatever.
>
** Makes a BIG difference when doing a Google search.
You posturing pile of autistic dog's vomit.
..... Phil
Patrick Turner
Andre Jute wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 12:31 pm, Patrick Turner <i...@turneraudio.com.au> wrote:
> > Andre Jute wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 10, 11:04 am, "Phil Allison" <philalli...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > > > ** See pic of prototype of this not yet released Quad model.
> >
> > > >http://www.avguide.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/th_quad-power-...
> >
> > > > I what looks like 4 x KT88s and 3 x octal twin triodes.
> >
> > > > BTW
> >
> > > > It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
> >
> > > > Projected cost is US $10k per pair.
> >
> > > > ...... Phil
> >
> > > What do you think of extending the range of amplifiers on the
> > > "classic" QUAD II case, Phil?
> >
> > > Andre Jute
> >
> > I realise you have asked Phil about the Q80
> > but allow me to say its a prudent move imho
> > by Quad bearing in mind the sensitivity of the
> > speakers made by Quad, and other people who might find 40 watts a
> > little too little.
>
> Quads are for music lovers, not headbangers. Or am I behind the times
> here?
Talk to ppl with Quad ESL 2805.
Maybe they like as many watts as possible.
One customer of mine found old Quad-II drive ESL57 just fine,
but not good enough for ESL63, let alone ESL989 which he also has.
>
> I find 25W more than enough to drive ESL63.
I know ppl who find a 300B is OK with dynamics of only 87dB sensitivity.
But most ppl would want many more watts.
>
> But actually my question to Phil, on which he picked up, was on the
> brand imae of the Quad II box style being transferred to the each new
> tube amp. That's a separate question from the gubbins of the amp.
Well when you are onto a good thing, stick to it.
Nothing much was wrong with the original Quad-II style of box and tube
layout,
so if the chassis is simply made longer and wider and still looks like a
Quad tube amp.
then that's a good marketing ploy.
Just what's under the bonnet is of more interest to me.
>
> > Having the ability for 80 watts class AB means that there will be a
> > truly
> > wide sweetzone of initial pure class A and owners need not worry that
> > the
> > tube bias current is quite low.
> > So the output tubes tend to last well.
> > In my 8585 amp 35mA is plenty at idle with Ea at 470V.
>
> Nothing will ever last as long as the original KT66 in the original
> QUAD II.
I have seen many of these amps melt down in my time.
KT66 running at full class A dissipation tempt fate,
AND the biasing method tends to allow one tube to run hot
if the other decides not to conduct the right Ia.
Peter Walker should have known that individual cathode biasing
would have been far better which was what Leak did to ensure long output
tube life
and even operation despite match changes with age.
>
> > I do hope Quad's method of biasing is better than most other brand
> > names.
> > I don't see any bias adjust pots or LED bias current indicators on the
> > picture of the
> > prototype. Without individual biasing if the bias is fixed and active
> > protection circuitry
> > there is a terribly common tendency for tubes to drift apart and cause
> > smoke and damage.
> >
> > I get fed up with having to revise the crummy design practices of major
> > and minor
> > amp makers.
> >
> > Quad should have got around to Q40, Q80 50 years ago but solid state
> > interupted development.
>
> I don't actually agree that all the silicon Quad amps were
> interruptions. I appreciate the easy-listening sound and decade-
> ranging reliability of the QUAD 405 Mk2.
Yes, not a bad SS amp, the 405.
But I struggle to find anyone here who treasures one.
The preamp that goes with it and the cabling systems have given me lots
a troubles though.
Sure the tube amps went on and on and were not "interupted", but what I
meant
was that after 1960, very little R&D went into tube amp design at all.
In old Wireless World mags from 1960 onwards, there is hardly any
article on tube anything.
It became focused totally about the latest SS crap, or if they did have
anything about tube audio
it was maybe a hybrid design for tubes; one notable one was a transistor
input driver
stage horror that I wouldn't ever bother building.
The new generation of young minds came onstream in about 1960 with all
these young clever dicks
publishing fancy shmancy articles about electronics in what they saw as
a brave new world,
and as the new alternative to their father's status quo. They became
known,
and scored the best jobs around in top firms.
Patrick Turner.
Patrick Turner
I searched about the Quad II Eighty and saw no schematic.
I expect its secret Quad business.
Anyway, i'd guess the simplest most effective way to
drive a quad of KT88 is with a simple LTP using a paralleled twin triode
on each side of the LTP,
and have twin triode paralleled for the input tube.
There IS NOT the slightest need to cascode anything, and certainly no
benefits from doing so.
But I read Paravicini is involved with the design.
I guess the Chinese 666 types mentioned by Phil can't do their own
design very well,
and need to have a name attatched which has old style prestige to
inspire confidence
in buyers.
I have repaired Paravicini horrors such as the EAR509;
his methods don't fill me with confidence.
Meanwhile, after 7 years of being online a Chinese company
emailed me offering a range of products including
OPTs which can be seen with typical grossly insufficient data at...
http://www.tonewin.cn/
Are the Chinese waking up about quality?
Patrick Turner.
Ian Iveson
>>> It is actually called the "' Quad II - Eighty " .
>>
>> Whatever.
>
> ** Makes a BIG difference when doing a Google search.
>
> You posturing pile of autistic dog's vomit.
Teamwork. Didn't we do well.
cheers, Ian
Iain Churches
"Patrick Turner" <in...@turneraudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:475FE577...@turneraudio.com.au...
>
> Meanwhile, after 7 years of being online a Chinese company
> emailed me offering a range of products including
> OPTs which can be seen with typical grossly insufficient data at...
> http://www.tonewin.cn/
>
> Are the Chinese waking up about quality?
>
It's just a matter of time.
I have been trying to find a pair of good
round-bezel broadcast quality VU meters.
Sifam in the UK still make them to order-
but they cost an arm and a leg.
Then I came upon a Taiwanese firm that said
they could supply just what I needed for USD 2
a piece.
They stated that their clients included a
certain well-known OEM whose products
Arny has praised here on RAT.
They sent me a pic or two of the meter I was
interested in. It was immediately apparent
that scale on the faceplate was not a
proper VU. I asked them for the technical
specification of their meter, and the ballistic
details (rise/fall time and overshoot was
strictly specified for proper broadcast meters)
I had to prompt them three times for a reply.
When it finally came, they asked: "What should
the ballistics be?" Please could I send details!
Hmm.
Regards to all
Iain
Patrick Turner
So what you are saying is that while there is hope that the Chinese
might eventually understand what it is the West wants, and actually
provide us with exactly what we do find acceptable, don't expect it to
happen soon.
They have taken 7 years to wake up that perhaps i might be interested in
their
OPTs et all.
I get numerous spam emails with lits of absoute crap I will never buy.
I have emailed them back to say why its all crap.
They keep sending the same details of same non de-craperized equipments.
All is low grade junk; so don't buy it.
The properly sent and addressed email offering goods from tonewin.com.cn
does not say they red my website on transformers.
Unfortunately I will have to email them to do so, and no doubt they
like all the others I have emailed they'll ignore it all and try to poke
shit down my neck with the broom handle.
For the OPTs on offer they detail core sizes, weights and turn numbers,
wire sizes,
insulation thicknesses method of varnishing, and all the stuff I need to
know to
see if they know if what they are fucking doing is any good at all.
The Chinese are so fucking dumb!!!
What do they take us for?
Idiots who can be conned easily?
Probably yes because they have a 3,000 year history of "civilisation"
and are as arrogant as they are ignorant.
I wish this wasn't so.
But unless they learn to be humble, and undo the appalling
reputation for terrible quality in every fucking thing they make then I
ain't interested
in their tubes, OPTs, meters, and they labour at most things in vain.
I ain't saving up for a Quad II Eighty either.
Way over priced!!!.
Patrick Turner.
Ian Iveson
> Are the Chinese waking up about quality?
They know about quality chopsticks.
They make all sorts of good stuff, wherever they have a home
market so they can know what this or that actual quality
means. Rifles, spacecraft, and paddy fields spring to mind.
They also manufacture heaps of high quality products as
OEMs, to strict specifications laid down by customers
outside China.
Quality is different for every product. No-one knows what it
means in general. When China develops a home market for a
particular product, it becomes able to originate quality
designs for that product.
And China is different for every Chinaman, probably.
Maybe a Chinaman bought an Australian chopstick and it was
useless and so he is wondering when, sigh, will Australia
wake up to quality, not stopping to think that it makes good
boomerangs.
Ian
Iain Churches
> So what you are saying is that while there is hope that the Chinese
> might eventually understand what it is the West wants, and actually
> provide us with exactly what we do find acceptable, don't expect it to
> happen soon.
They seem good at copying other people's ideas, and let them do
the R+D which costs money. Inscruitable Chinkie then copies the
design and builds it at 1/10 of the price.
In the case I quote, the VU the standard has been established since 1935,
so any respectable meter manufacturer should be able to get the face-plate
scale right, with the correct needle ballistics.
>
> They have taken 7 years to wake up that perhaps i might be interested in
> their
> OPTs et all.
> I get numerous spam emails with lits of absoute crap I will never buy.
> I have emailed them back to say why its all crap.
> They keep sending the same details of same non de-craperized equipments.
I am in a similar situation. Have you notice they all have
sales personel with "westernised" names. I was dealing
with "Yyvonne Lee"
>
> All is low grade junk; so don't buy it.
> The Chinese are so fucking dumb!!!
> What do they take us for?
> Idiots who can be conned easily?
They may be a lot smarter than you think.
Just look at the balance of trade figs between
China and the USA!!!
>
> But unless they learn to be humble, and undo the appalling
> reputation for terrible quality in every fucking thing they make then I
> ain't interested
> in their tubes, OPTs, meters, and they labour at most things in vain.
They seem to be keen on "making a sale" with no
service or backup thereafter. A colleague of mine
bought a milling machine, for about Euro 10 000.
It was delivered in a crate as component parts.
He had to put it together himself. It turned out to
be fair. It was a cheaper copy of a old UK
machine by Herbert Ltd, but the prognosis
regardings it's longevity is not good due to the
quality of the bearings and the general construction
tolerances.
If he had bought a nachine from Germany, Italy
the UK, or even Poland, it would have been through
a proper dealer chain with after sales service etc, but at
ten times the price.
You pays yer money, and taker yer choice:-)
Regards to all
Iain
Patrick Turner
Ian Iveson wrote:
>
> Patrick ranted:
>
> > Are the Chinese waking up about quality?
>
> They know about quality chopsticks.
>
> They make all sorts of good stuff, wherever they have a home
> market so they can know what this or that actual quality
> means. Rifles, spacecraft, and paddy fields spring to mind.
> They also manufacture heaps of high quality products as
> OEMs, to strict specifications laid down by customers
> outside China.
>
> Quality is different for every product. No-one knows what it
> means in general.
Huh? I know crap when I see it though.
Generally, crap has the umistakable signs of being crap, unless one's
mind is a crappy mind,
in which case crap is accepted without question until smoke pours forth
and the music stops
after a loud buzz or crackling sound, and there is not the slightest
after sales service.
I do see the obvious thing you are trying to say, ie Quad
makes an attempt to ensure the Quad products made in China
come up to western developed countries national expectations about
quality.
What you pay for Quad products includes whatever amount of trouble some
smart bastard
went to whip the Chinese into doing exactly what a specification said in
every way it said it.
> When China develops a home market for a
> particular product, it becomes able to originate quality
> designs for that product.
But I doubt the Chinese Home Brand quality will be very good at all.
The Chinese are so far behind in average national standards of living
that all they make is made down to a price, not up to a quality.
Quad never ever sold anything to poor folks in rich countries.
In 1960, the rich, ie, doctors, lawyers, accountants, smart arses did
have money
for Quad and Jaguars but the vast majority of people had to buy a Sanyo.
Local product quality in Japan rose when ppl could afford it.
The same is yet to happen in China.
Its going to be a long time before we see a Chinese home brand vacuum
tube amp
which is GENUINELY better quality than the best in the west.
Of course the west is trying hard to allow the Chinese to succeed
by caving into pressure to cheapen the quality of their products day by
day.
Much of my work last year was to alter western contry made amps which
smoked their occupants and stole their music.
>
> And China is different for every Chinaman, probably.
>
> Maybe a Chinaman bought an Australian chopstick and it was
> useless and so he is wondering when, sigh, will Australia
> wake up to quality, not stopping to think that it makes good
> boomerangs.
I have not searched for details about exports of Ox made chopsticks.
I think it'd be as pointless as searching on details of of steel
exports into Shefield, or coal into Newcastle.
But now the steel industry and coal industry is all but defunct in the
UK...
who would bother to care about chopsticks?
I could carve a very nice pair in about 30 minutes, and they'd last
maybe
10 years, never overheat, never fail with a cloud of smoke,
and make no brown smells.
Patrick Turner.
>
> Ian
Patrick Turner
Not one chinese brandname in the top 100 product names in the world.
They have lightyears to travel before being top dog in quality.
The demand for quantity is ruing any chance quality will be sought
after.
> >
> > But unless they learn to be humble, and undo the appalling
> > reputation for terrible quality in every fucking thing they make then I
> > ain't interested
> > in their tubes, OPTs, meters, and they labour at most things in vain.
>
> They seem to be keen on "making a sale" with no
> service or backup thereafter. A colleague of mine
> bought a milling machine, for about Euro 10 000.
> It was delivered in a crate as component parts.
> He had to put it together himself. It turned out to
> be fair. It was a cheaper copy of a old UK
> machine by Herbert Ltd, but the prognosis
> regardings it's longevity is not good due to the
> quality of the bearings and the general construction
> tolerances.
>
> If he had bought a nachine from Germany, Italy
> the UK, or even Poland, it would have been through
> a proper dealer chain with after sales service etc, but at
> ten times the price.
>
> You pays yer money, and taker yer choice:-)
I had offers for a transformer winding machine for aud $2,500, about usd
$2,200 these days
all with very poor details about exactly what it could do.
I emailed back saying how I made a lathe myself for under $200 and 3
days effort.
Could they provide me with something sililar but with an automatic wire
traversing guide?
I never heard from them again. Dumb Kuntz!
Patrick Turner.
> Regards to all
> Iain
Ian Iveson
> Not one chinese brandname in the top 100 product names in
> the world.
Says who?
A brand could be sold only in China, and still be the top
brand in the world. Depends how you define "top", doesn't
it? I suspect you define it in a way that excludes Chinese
brands.
A Chinese brand name would be in a script you can't read and
couldn't pronounce.
Conversely, an international household name could be Chinese
and you might think it's British, or American. Less likely
you might think it's Australian, unless it's beer or a soap
opera.
In between are names phonetically rendered in our script,
such as Shanling. Arguably Shanling is not Chinese, arguably
it is.
Depends what you mean by Chinese brand. Quad?
Was it Bret who seriously asked if there were any known
brands of audio equipment in mainland Europe? Ignorance and
xenophobia are natural partners.
> They have lightyears to travel before being top dog in
> quality.
Meaning what, precisely? Where is the list of countries in
order of quality of produce? Luckily for xenophobia, it
doesn't have to worry about meaning.
> The demand for quantity is ruing any chance quality will
> be sought
> after.
In what ways, exactly, are quality and quantity mutually
exclusive?
> I had offers for a transformer winding machine for aud
> $2,500, about usd
> $2,200 these days
> all with very poor details about exactly what it could do.
> I emailed back saying how I made a lathe myself for under
> $200 and 3
> days effort.
> Could they provide me with something sililar but with an
> automatic wire
> traversing guide?
>
> I never heard from them again.
I wonder why.
> Dumb Kuntz!
Maybe it's an attitude thing?
So, you got what you wanted somewhere else? Somehow I doubt
it.
Ian
Patrick Turner
Ian Iveson wrote:
>
> Patrick Turner wrote
>
> > Not one chinese brandname in the top 100 product names in
> > the world.
>
> Says who?
>
> A brand could be sold only in China, and still be the top
> brand in the world. Depends how you define "top", doesn't
> it? I suspect you define it in a way that excludes Chinese
> brands.
>
> A Chinese brand name would be in a script you can't read and
> couldn't pronounce.
>
> Conversely, an international household name could be Chinese
> and you might think it's British, or American. Less likely
> you might think it's Australian, unless it's beer or a soap
> opera.
>
> In between are names phonetically rendered in our script,
> such as Shanling. Arguably Shanling is not Chinese, arguably
> it is.
>
> Depends what you mean by Chinese brand. Quad?
Quad is owned by Chinese ppl.
>
> Was it Bret who seriously asked if there were any known
> brands of audio equipment in mainland Europe? Ignorance and
> xenophobia are natural partners.
>
> > They have lightyears to travel before being top dog in
> > quality.
>
> Meaning what, precisely? Where is the list of countries in
> order of quality of produce? Luckily for xenophobia, it
> doesn't have to worry about meaning.
Think of the progress towards quality made by the Japanese.
After WW2, they pumped out copied shite and well designed original
Japanese shite
and westeners still bought it because its was cheaper than shite made in
their
own countries.
But as the years wore on, the Japs learned to make better cameras and
cars
than anyone in contries they exported to, and so Toyotas were not toys
any longer.
Lux amps were rather good.
And the Japs banned anyone exporting gear made to quality standards
the Japanese demanded in Japan, and cars, cameras and electronics
made in Japan for their local market were really well ahead of many
other folks.
They innovated and out-did their western nation rivals.
Seems to me the Chinese could pull the same trick.
It'll take awhile. The Chinese also face the brunt of costs
to reduce greenhouse and to fight environmental meltdown.
Westeners don't want Chinese prices to rise so the Chinese can afford to
stop carbon emissions and clean up theier filthy industries.
But lemme tellya,
the $40 electric kettle I bought and which lasts 3 years running with
250V instead
of 220V isn't a bad deal. The shoes and clothes are all dirt cheap,
and good enough.
But the electronics such as vacuum tubed amps which are NOT mainstream
are mainly SHITE QUALITY. The exception is probably Quad's amp,
and boy do people pay for it!!!!
But the cheap end of the market is truly appalling, with 40+40 W amps
costing only aud $700.00, and last year I had to re-engineer two of
these...
But this present flood of mostly crap Chinese productions is no worse
that the appalling crap put out by many
US, UK and Oz companies in the 1960s....
It was advertized as being absolutely farkin marvellous, but actually
wasn't.
I have re-engineered many samples of this sort of thing.
As a result, THD is reduced on average 12dB, stability made
unconditional,
and reliability far better.
Despite the poor OPTs, such horrors can easily sing better than
many samples of budget SS amps by Creek, Cambridge etc.....
>
> > The demand for quantity is ruing any chance quality will
> > be sought
> > after.
>
> In what ways, exactly, are quality and quantity mutually
> exclusive?
Because Quality costs too much for most folks.
We'd all have ARC standards ( without the multiple inherent faults of
ARC amps )
if quality cost no more than shite to produce.
>
> > I had offers for a transformer winding machine for aud
> > $2,500, about usd
> > $2,200 these days
> > all with very poor details about exactly what it could do.
> > I emailed back saying how I made a lathe myself for under
> > $200 and 3
> > days effort.
> > Could they provide me with something sililar but with an
> > automatic wire
> > traversing guide?
> >
> > I never heard from them again.
>
> I wonder why.
>
> > Dumb Kuntz!
>
> Maybe it's an attitude thing?
Yeah, they loathe me and I loathe them.
>
> So, you got what you wanted somewhere else? Somehow I doubt
> it.
I don't NEED an auto traversing mechanism to feed the wire onto coils I
wind.
I get buy without blaming my tools.
Because I make such low numbers of wound items, and because winding is
only
one of many processes involved in total time for choke and transformer
manufacture,
having an expensive winding lathe isn't needed. I do have to stop
winding during
some layers and adjust the positions of wires to get even layering with
no crossed over turns.
So winding nice flat layers takes me 3 times as long as the factory
tradesman or tradeswoman.
But winding is only part of it....
Lance Armstrong had a few bicycles maybe worth 10 grand each to win the
TDF 7 times in a row.
I like a bike ride but if I spend 10 grand to get a bike that's 1.5Kg
lighter than the
bike I ride now, and thus as good as Lance's, I ain't going to travel
any faster or better; I would travel
in fear of being mugged, and relieved of the expensive bicycle,
or in fear of the carbon fibre snapping abruptly after a zillion kms, or
wiping it out
so easily in a fall, or an altercation with a motorist.
If I have the very best electric drill, is the hole I drill going to be
any better
than the one drilled my ceap in 1982 Sher 2 speed, now 25 years old and
still going well?
The Metabo I bought at 3 times the price in '82 required a $200 fix
after 1/2 the Sher's work
and finally failed again soon after that fix.
It was nice to use but its weight and wrist effects were not good...
I WON'T buy cheap Chinese specialist tools such as a winding lathe
unless the purveyors of such articles
can demonstrate the wonders, or the price just don't matter.
I know a guy who obtained a very old German (made probably pre 1939)
coil winder
from an old guy retiring at about 80. What a dream it is to use!!!
An electric drill which will allow me to carry on now costs 1/4 of the
real
price 1982 Sher drill price, so if it smokes one day I just would bin it
because getting a fix is entirely a waste.
I use cheap Chinese soldering irons because Wellers at 3 times the price
lasted only
12 months. After 3, I went to the Chinese irons.
The first lasted a month only, and then i realized the mains here is
255V some days,
and on an evening, looking into the iron end without a tip the body was
red hot.
So I added a steel box and a bunch of resistors to drop the iron voltage
to
210Vrms, and the last 3 Chinese irons have lasted over a year each.
I learned to make my own tips, and keep the tip from expanding
solidly inside the iron end.
The Chinese irons are obviously made for 200Vrms....
One has to learn to alter some things to make them last....
Without any efforts by Chinese to prove to me their gear is just grand,
I assume it is SHITE that they sell.
Weller welcomed me to send them my two stuffed irons, and i did,
so they could examine why they failed.
They sent me a free replacement, saying it would last years and years
and they admitted they had had salt problems in the water used for the
ceramic mix used on the heating coils.
But the replacement didn't last any better.
I am hopeless at training stubborn elephants how to behave, and gave up
buying from Weller. The Wellers were made by Cooper Tools in an Oz
factory
300km down the road at Albury-Wodonga, and presumably their
salt problems were due to the local river water supply.
But I bet someone at Weller or Cooper thought it was amazing that their
irns lasted so fuckin long, and definately long enough, because you know
many
people will come back for another. Recalcitant professional arsoles
always think nicely in favour of the profit line before concerns
about longevity and reliability.
The Chinese irons are available at Bunnings, a large hardware store
which automatically gives our new irons without any begging if one fails
soon.
Why? because what they sell for $20 costs them only $2 from China,
because they buy 10,000 pcs at a time, and if 1/2 fail prematurely, who
cares?
90% of irons will be bought just to do one job, and then they remain
unused by the diyer
for months. But mine sits on my bench and turned on all day, weeks on
end...
I don't care a hoot if my attitude is offensive to anyone.
Patrick Turner.
>
> Ian