The KISS AMP: John Stewart's "contribution"
Andre Jute
John Stewart wrote:
> But why bother going further with this half-baked amplifier? It is the
> effort of an amateur.
>
> My opinion, anyway. John Stewart
Earlier opinions from John Stewart included "Bunk!", sent about six
times. But no technical details. Stewart is a qualified engineer once
employed as a salesman by Hewlett Packard and a contributor to some of
the same hobby magazines I once wrote for (the difference being that
they paid me about ten times what they pay him; still not enough to
make it worthwhile, though). He is therefore presumed capable of making
a technical analysis of an amplifier. He hasn't. In fact, many moons
ago I sent John Stewart at his request by mail earlier versions of the
two circuits in question and heard not a single adverse word from him.
We discussed these circuits on RAT before, and, guess what, not a
single adverse word from John. Suddenly we have "Bunk" (six times or
more) and "half-baked" from John Stewart, and "amateur" hurled as an
epithet. Is the difference that since then I have written about the
"Ugly Engineers"?
If you have a technical point, Stewart, make it. I never claimed to be
anything other than an amateur. I published the circuit for discussion.
I invited discussion. So far, from you, we have had only abuse, in
circumstances that lead one to the conclusion that you consider
electronic virtue to be a popularity contest, which is a most
unprofessional attitude (1). The circuit you want is here, just so you
don't make the same mistake as some other clowns and start talking
pointlessly about a part-proto used to prove a part of another amp as
if it is the main event (oops! you have already!):
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T39-KISS-300B-Ultrafi-crct.jpg
I look forward to your *technical* contribution to improving my
"half-baked" "amateur" circuit, if you wouldn't mind condescending to
the level of actually talking technicalities about the circuit under
discussion instead of sputtering "Bunk!" into your booze because I
clipped some fellows from your fraternity's bargain basement in the ear
for impertinence. Stick to what you know, which is the electronics, and
you will find me, and many others, onside.
I've opened a whole thread for you so you can take all the bandwidth
you think you are entitled to.
Andre Jute
Professional dilettante
(1) If this is how professional engineers behave, I'll cling tooth and
nail to my amateur status.
Henry Pasternack
> I never claimed to be anything other than an amateur.
Untrue. It is well-known that you claimed to be the owner of a commercial
audio design firm. For instance, on August 17th, 1999, you wrote:
> The rest (my own audio firm Real McCoy Audio's proprietary tests) they
> dragged out of me with their flame war. This is expensively obtained insider
> information that one doesn't normally give away.
Even if you are not the engineer responsible for design work at Real McCoy
Audio, it is disingenuous for you to represent yourself as a mere amateur given
your status as a commercial equipment manufacturer and design consultant.
So, where can I see some examples of equipment produced by Real McCoy
Audio?
-Henry
Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:
In the same Hall of Fame as his car designs and Pulitzer prizes....
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Andre Jute
content to let the reject fire sale "ugly engineers" Pinkerton and
Pasternack flame on your behalf? Their posts have as little technical
content as yours, and an even lower quality of abuse.
We're waiting, pal.
Andre Jute
Amateur
Hypertension
"Andre Jute" <fiu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1143903862....@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
<snip smokescreen>
> I never claimed to be
> anything other than an amateur
<snip smokescreen>
Au contraire, M.Jute. You have *often* claimed to license designs to audio
equipment manufacturers. You have also bragged about the astronomical sums
you made writing for various audio mags and your disdain when editors have
wanted you to contribute for nothing. If you won't fire up your Apple for
nix, I doubt that you'd license an amp design without some monetary
consideration. I think that knocks your claim to amateur status on the head.
Unqualified and possibly incompetent, yes. Amateur, no.
Appended is a selection of quotes from Usenet and JoeNet posts made by you,
complete with links. Do you deny writing them?
Hypertension
Andre Jute wrote
Actually, I see I have a circuit standing on my computer for
my original T17 "Solist" of the period 1992-1994, reverse-engineered
after the event when I licensed the design
RAT Mar 1 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/msg/d28c8e31b4052fac?&hl=en
I can't license the design because it would
compete with the one codenamed Zero,
<and>
Hmm. I actually have suitable casework for that already, a
pre-production sample sent for my approval on another design
RAT Mar 1 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/msg/c9525cc328c86f70?&hl=en
I always intended to publish my horn for DIY as well*. But when I rose this
afternoon the bigotry,
intolerance and outright stupidity I read on the list pissed me off so much
that I called a manufacturer in Denmark and asked him if wants to licence
whatever horn I decide to make with whatever driver catches my fancy. He
does. My lawyer in New York was up, we agreed terms, contracts were
exchanged by fax, and a check is in the post.
<footnote to above>
*When I came here first, I promised that, in the spirit of the ARRL, I would
publish an amp design for DIYers. Because all my existing designs at the
time were committed to manufacturers and thus not mine to publish, I
shall later this year publish a modular 300B series which I have developed
for amateur construction, of which the protoypes are currently on the bench.
JoeNet 15 May 1997
Quoted on RAT 29 Mar 1999
It was this consideration which persuaded me to sell my last pair of good
ESL57 when a Japanese gentleman who licensed an amp from me made me an
exceptional offer to have them in his collection.
RAT 30 Dec 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/msg/1ff9ff4b2f782c91?&hl=en
I dont waste time and effort making beautiful fittings for an item I will
break up next week. When the proto works, if I license it, I charge extra
for designing great casework, and someone else builds the proto of the
casework for me to approve and for the factory to copy.
RAT 24 Dec 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/msg/c880fc40125b5018?&hl=en
I design ultra-fi tube gear, which I license to manufacturers in Northern
Ireland and the Far East
Aus.Hi-fi 30 Dec 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/aus.hi-fi/msg/2d51aca4c76d2040?&hl=en
The truth is that your 18 month flame war on me . has turned me into
such an expert on net stalkers and protecting oneself against them--and
profiting from their activities--that the books and articles and
consulting fees from frightened companies . will amount to seven
figures when it is all in.
You think that by your smear campaign you have killed design work flowing
in. Quite the
opposite: you are so well hated in the industry for your selfish
disruptions, many manufacturers and distributors have volunteered
components and projects and design work, more than I ever dreamed of
<regarding some OEM transformer users>
most are so minuscule that my tiny custom amp firm builds more protos every
quarter than several of them
collectively sell amps in a year-
RAT 1 August 1999
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.tubes/msg/670e987b3e033d2f?
Jutes original post of 2 April 2006
pf...@aol.com
> > But why bother going further with this half-baked amplifier? It is the
> > effort of an amateur.
> > I look forward to your *technical* contribution to improving my
> "half-baked" "amateur" circuit, if you wouldn't mind condescending to
> the level of actually talking technicalities about the circuit under
> discussion instead of sputtering "Bunk!" into your booze because I
> clipped some fellows from your fraternity's bargain basement in the ear
> for impertinence.
> (1) If this is how professional engineers behave, I'll cling tooth and
> nail to my amateur status.
Mr. McCoy:
In point of fact, Mr. Stewart did the best service he could for the
Audio Community, he stated quite correctly, accurately and with as few
words as necessary the sum-total merit of your design, being
"half-baked" and "bunk"
Just imagine what any individual actually attempting to follow your
flight of fancy from conception to execution:
He/She would have purchased an inappropriate power-transformer, as you
never stated you used 'what you had lying around', but carefully
specified *that* transformer for *that* purpose. Any ethical designer
would have stated that some expedients used were because the
transformer was not exactly as needed... such as having 6.3V filament
secondaries vs. 6.6V. Or the appropriate B+ voltage, and so forth.
Had he/she attempted your various bias designs, that would have been a
comedy. One design silent, one sending an expensive control a hard dose
of heat with the potential for *poof*. Again, an ethical designer would
have allowed for all of this up-front.
Then we have the dropping resistors... suddenly recalculated to a
reasonable wattage, although the need for so-called 'ballast' resistors
remains dubious if the proper transformer is specified... again an
ethical....
And, even your sparse notes don't quite show how one gets from the 500V
@ 500ma secondary to the 180V B+ in your design... you rely/hide
behind CYA notes such as 'add a small cap here' and so forth to avoid
responsibility for that bit of flummery as well. What happened, did JB
do the calculations for you? Again a ethical....
Oh well. As you are God's Gift to Tube Design, and your devices are
necessarily perfect and require no explanation or clarifications, who
are we to discuss even the obvious points, obvious to one such as
myself who might best be described as 'clean-up' as I am usually the
one who is tasked with repairing smoking ruins, wild distortion or
other defects from designers such as yourself. No, I have never
designed an amp 'from scratch', but I sure have cleaned up a bunch.
Maybe when I have more time for this hobby, I might.
But, Mr. Stewart has made 100% of the comments necessary for the
design(s) as presented. Anything additional would only dignify it as
something worthwhile.
Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA
Andre Jute
I wouldn't want you to think I am not appreciative of all the interest
you take in my every doing and my every utterance going back to my
birthcries, but have you considered getting a life of your own?
Even more I hate to spoil your wistful dream, but that list below which
so impresses you wouldn't keep the doors of a professional design shop
open for a fortnight, never mind the fifteen years in which electronics
have been my hobby. At best you can say I am an amateur who got lucky;
even so, the income from the electronics in your list might just have
paid for the polyprop caps I used in prototypes in those fifteen years.
Andre Jute
Tube amps are an expensive mistress
Andre Jute
This is the third day on which your old man's spiteful sputtering
stands unexplained on the newsgroup. Do you intend to make a useful
technical contribution about the circuit under discussion? Or are you
content to be classed with the flaming scum already infesting this
thread I created to give you elbow-room?
Andre Jute
John Stewart
> John Stewart wrote:
Thankyou for the opportunity provided here to comment on your many posts
on RAT. My Nutscape counted something like 864 over the past nine
months. It is time to call a Spade a Spade.
I had not done so in the past as I felt this forum is for all comers, no
matter what their opinions. But now I really must say something, since
it is the kind of bullshit you have posted here over the last several
months that causes many of us to be looked upon by others as
'AudioPhools'.
Unlike you, I don't spend a lot of time here on the net for any reason,
including reading your drivel.
You must be genetically related to a Chameleon, showing up here in many
colorful disguises. You are also quite similar to a small child, doing
anything to attract attention. God knows why anyone would consider you
as a source of quality audio equipment. Lots of cosmetics but little of
substance under the cover.
I recall first seeing that single tube thing (preamp, line amp, pwr
amp?) about three years ago & commented at the time I thought it to be a
very expensive way to charge a battery. It hasn't changed & we still
have no measurement data. What is is supposed to do? Perhaps charge a
battery or none of the above well!
A quick look at that WE417 thing finds a 0R68, 50 W resistor dissipating
2.45 watts. And a 0R47, 50 W resistor is dissipating 41 mW. We see two
330R, 25 W resistors in the plate leads of the rectifier. They won't
help much should there be a cap failure. I also see two very expensive
Ludahl chokes hooked up to stop common mode PS problems. That
interference will get in thru the back door on your heater leads. Better
a power line device such as made by Schaffner. That will stop anything
from getting in. And at a much better cost.
Your 6SN7/300B amp could be improved easily by a simple circuit
addition. I will leave it to you, the self professed whiz to figure that
one out.
Please show us how any of the circuits you have posted are in any way
superior to any other common circuit consisting of the same parts. In
the real world performance is measured by results vs. cost. Your stuff
fails that test in a most miserable way.
And if you have a red phone to contact Ed Dell at Audio Amatuer let us
know that as well. How else would you know you were paid more than I?
And what does it matter?
Spiteful? I did not intend that at all. Factual? Yes, indeed!
Fiultra = Ultrafi? Phooey! Oh, and BUNK!
Professional you are. But the category really is BullShit!
My thoughts anyway. Cheers to all, John Stewart PEng
John Stewart
Thankyou for the opportunity provided here to comment on your many posts
on RAT. My Nutscape counted something like 864 over the past nine
months. It is time to call a Spade a Spade.
I had not done so in the past as I felt this forum is for all comers, no
matter what their opinions. But now I really must say something, since
it is the kind of bullshit you have posted here over the last several
months that causes many of us to be looked upon by others as
'AudioPhools'.
Unlike you, I don't spend a lot of time here on the net for any reason,
including reading your drivel.
You must be genetically related to a Chameleon, showing up here in many
colorful disguises. You are also quite similar to a small child, doing
anything to attract attention. God knows why anyone would consider you
as a source of quality audio equipment. Lots of cosmetics but little of
substance under the cover.
I recall first seeing that single tube thing (preamp, line amp, pwr
amp?) about three years ago & commented at the time I thought it to be a
very expensive way to charge a battery. It hasn't changed & we still
have no measurement data. What is is supposed to do? Perhaps charge a
battery or none of the above well!
A quick look at that WE417 thing finds a 0R68, 50 W resistor dissipating
2.45 watts. And a 0R47, 50 W resistor is dissipating 164 mW. We see two
Andre Jute
below). I asked him specifically to discuss this circuit:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T39-KISS-300B-Ultrafi-crct.jpg
He doesn't say anything about it, perhaps because he can find no nits
to pick. Instead he discusses an obsolete version of this circuit:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/t68mzwe417acircuit.jpg
which I specifically told him was only a temporary proto to prove part
of the circuit he should have discussed. The ratings of the resistors
he mentions were changed well before this. Perhaps he chose to write
about an obsolete circuit to have a nit to pick. He wants me to use,
instead of the traditional chokes, some line conditioner made by
Schaffner (yech!), presumably his current employers. He then says
about yet another circuit:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T44bis-'Populaire'-crct.jpg
that
> Your 6SN7/300B amp could be improved easily by a simple circuit
> addition. I will leave it to you, the self professed whiz to figure that
> one out.
abuse and spite. If this is the best John Stewart PEng can come up
with, I'll put him in my killfile with the other useless Ugly
"Engineers".
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
*********
This is my original objection to an earlier torrent of
zero-technical-content abuse by John Stewart:
*********
Andre Jute
Professional dilettante
*********
Here is John Stewart PEng's silly reply:
*********
John Stewart PEngwrote: