Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 16 George Wright MONO 2A3 amps : New, one-day-old, independent input : Deang described his George Wright 2A3 monoblocks as " most anemic, flat sounding". I posted it's actual schematic, and explained precisely WHY the amp sounds that way. On February 1, 2020 two nice Forum Members took exception, with my George Wright 2A3 monoblock description. I have new information to submit - one day old - very interesting ! This weekend, a DIY audiophile I sometimes amp-mentor, emailed - to tell me what he RTA ( Real Time Analyzer) measured and what he heard, with his new 2A3 amp design, VERSUS one of his own George Wright 2A3 monoblock amps. He was comparing a mono channel of his long-time personal-use George Wright 2A3 amps, to a bread-boarded single channel of the new 2A3 design, with no parts broken-in yet, on his bread-boarded amp.. Well, here is what he wrote / described yesterday, .......which coincides well with Deang's comments, and my contentions fully : ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ " stomps the Wright amp on all fronts ". One more time, I will remind you all what is important, Low DCR to the Final's Stage ( 2A3) - is of utmost importance. The George Wright 2A3 is yellow-highlighted on my previously-posted schematic - and has 420 Ohms of series DCR to the 2A3. Ed, however, is using two 11 Ohm Hammond 159Y chokes in series, ( L1/C1/L2/C2, L1= L2 ) for a total of 22 Ohms. 420 Ohms VS.......... only...... 22 Ohms. You can see a fine technical explanation of this need for low DCR, by a prior Dean of the College of Electrical Engineering at the University of Alabama. Go back to my "big" KT88 Direct Coupled amp build thread, in 2019, Page 8 in that thread, about five pages back - in the " Talkin Tubes " Directory. Read and digest on page 8, a 1987 letter to me from Dean Charles A. Halijak, " Figure of Merit of a Power Supply ". 98% of tube amps existing today are in-the-dark completely about this. Since 2018 and 2019, we use four Ohm and six Ohm power supply chokes, with excellent results. That is only 8 or 12 Ohms total, of inductor DCR, for two chokes in a series B+ filter connection ( L1/C1/L2/C2 ), to a 2A3 or a KT-88. Performance counts !! Jeff Medwin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tube fanatic 787 Posted February 17 Jeffrey, your friend’s preference of his own amp over the Wright doesn’t make him right! Apparently, some folks have praised the sound of the Wright amps: http://www.audioreview.com/product/amplification/amplifiers/wright-sound/wpa-3-5-monoblocks.html Are you saying that those owners didn’t know what to listen for? Maynard 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 17 1 hour ago, tube fanatic said: Jeffrey, your friend’s preference of his own amp over the Wright doesn’t make him right! Apparently, some folks have praised the sound of the Wright amps: http://www.audioreview.com/product/amplification/amplifiers/wright-sound/wpa-3-5-monoblocks.html Are you saying that those owners didn’t know what to listen for? Maynard No Maynard. This is not from " memory " of owning a Wright mono 2A3 amp some several years ago. Ed owns the Wrights today, uses them regularly, and is A-Bing these two amps in his home, over this past weekend!! On an E.E. basis, this is fully explained by Dean Halijak's 1989 letter to me " Figure of Merit of a Power Supply " . Re-read it . ANY positive review you may read about a Wright 2A3 amp, ( especially after seeing the schematic and understanding my highlights ), must be taken in the context of the reviewer's tube audio amplifier listening experience. They just have never experienced top notch stuff. If you are not experiencing the best possible, lesser will be fine. Its very simple. Jeff Medwin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tube fanatic 787 Posted February 17 The comments were made at the time of ownership, not from memory. The bottom line here, is listener satisfaction. These folks liked what they heard! Would they have liked your amp better? Who knows? It would be instructive to go back and read the goals of the nascent hifi industry to put this in its proper context. Basically, if someone is happy with the sound they are hearing, no one will convince them that they are incorrect for doing so. And, I must restate what I posed to you previously- if person A says the system sounds wonderful, and person B says it sounds like crap, who is correct??? Maynard 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 17 23 hours ago, tube fanatic said: The comments were made at the time of ownership, not from memory. The bottom line here, is listener satisfaction. These folks liked what they heard! Would they have liked your amp better? Who knows? It would be instructive to go back and read the goals of the nascent hifi industry to put this in its proper context. Basically, if someone is happy with the sound they are hearing, no one will convince them that they are incorrect for doing so. And, I must restate what I posed to you previously- if person A says the system sounds wonderful, and person B says it sounds like crap, who is correct??? Maynard Yes, at the time of ownership, but they didn't have Ed's amp there to directly compare it to !! They were unaware that such a design existed then, are are still-so today, in all likelyhood. 22 Ohms DCR and two, not three tube stages, etc etc etc. Both can be correct. Its a function of their experiences, over their lifetime, listening. From my prior post, cogent here: " ANY positive review you may read about a Wright 2A3 amp, ( especially after seeing the schematic and understanding my highlights ), must be taken in the context of the reviewer's tube audio amplifier listening experience. They just have never experienced top notch stuff. If you are not experiencing the best possible, lesser will be fine. Its very simple. " Jeff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kevinmi 557 Posted February 17 9 minutes ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said: Its a function of their experiences, over their lifetime, listening. How come it can't be a function of how one person hears things differently than another? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 17 Just now, kevinmi said: How come it can't be a function of how one person hears things differently than another? It could be that also, I agree. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tube fanatic 787 Posted February 17 Thank you for finally conceding the point that I've been trying to make here! So, while your suggested modifications to George Wright's amp design may have some degree of technical merit, to some listeners it will result in what they perceive as poorer sound! The first paragraph of the following states the case better than I can: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3578393/ Time for dinner...... Maynard Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 17 22 hours ago, tube fanatic said: Thank you for finally conceding the point that I've been trying to make here! So, while your suggested modifications to George Wright's amp design may have some degree of technical merit, to some listeners it will result in what they perceive as poorer sound! The first paragraph of the following states the case better than I can: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3578393/ Time for dinner...... Maynard Thats fine with me, Maynard. I would't modify the Wright 2A3. I'd just dump it on eBay to someone unknown to me, who would be pleased to have it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
richieb 6021 Posted February 17 24 minutes ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said: Thats fine with me, Maynard. I would't modify the Wright 2A3. I'd just dump it on someone whop would be pleased to have it. Too bad Mr. Wright isn’t here to defend his design/circuit for better or worse. But alas, he passed several years ago — Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CECAA850 26315 Posted February 17 On 1/31/2020 at 12:28 PM, Jeffrey D. Medwin said: I am busy with the stock market ( see my thread I started this week in LOUNGE section Yet another boner of a thread. I have to admit though, I always get a chuckle out of your posts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
richieb 6021 Posted February 18 1 hour ago, CECAA850 said: Yet another boner of a thread. Yep, this thread is Hard to take — 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CECAA850 26315 Posted February 18 36 minutes ago, richieb said: Yep, this thread is Hard to take — I see what you did there. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marvel 4194 Posted February 18 There's always the synergy thing that goes on with equipment. Some speakers simply sound bad with certain amps. Bruce 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 18 19 hours ago, richieb said: Too bad Mr. Wright isn’t here to defend his design/circuit for better or worse. But alas, he passed several years ago — I agree with you fully on that , its truly unfortunate that he's passed away. But Richie, there is no defense for what I see on that schematic . 420 Ohms of DCR to the 2A3 Finals, and a single 5Y3 rectifier tube. And negative feedback in an all triode amp !! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffrey D. Medwin 147 Posted February 18 20 hours ago, richieb said: Yep, this thread is Hard to take — Richie, Sometimes the cold hard truth is hard to take !! 420 Ohms DCR does not play music like 22 Ohms DCR, no matter how much you enjoyed the amps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
