The SET Debate (again)

[Parrot]

I think Edwin explained in his first post why the SET sound appeals to some: The unique perspective, the compression, the AM-radiolike sound. The unique perspective has a lot to do with the midrange, which is emphasized because the rest of the bands are so lacking. The compression is inevitable because 1 or 2 watts isn't sufficient to reproduce music without severely squishing it. The AM radio sound description is totally appropriate because of the AM radios of our fathers from the 1930s and 1940s that many of us forum members grew up listening to.

Add the nature of the sound to the inverse bragging rights about how little power the SET system has and the pseudo-sophistication of SET listeners as exemplified by the supposed newbie, khornn, and there's a certain kind of logic to the choice. I suppose that SET's "tiny window of sound" makes a certain kind of listener feel safer, protected from the onslaught of real-sounding reproduced music.

Feelings of security, sophistication, and superiority--an enticing mix.

[triode]

Craig

PS Kev my fuse was kind of short yesterday for some reason. I reread the thread and think I may have taken you out a context a few times..... sorry! It just pisses me off that we can't just have a simple serious conversation about the different topologies. To me the subject is very interesting.

Craig has just now discovered that the common element in all of his disfunctional relationships is himself!

[NOSValves]

----------------

On 5/2/2005 7:16:56 AM jacksonbart wrote:

Given all the passionate views, thought this might come in handy to have some info before your trip to Indy.

----------------

Trust me these things never get that serious......well they haven't yet

[NOSValves]

Craig has just now discovered that the common element in all of his disfunctional relationships is himself!

No I still think the same of you as I did yesterday. Nothing has changed there...... just another trouble maker.

Craig

[kev313]

Thanks for that contribution, Paul. Is that "sophistication" element in your post a refrence to my earlier posts?

[Parrot]

----------------

On 5/2/2005 7:35:28 AM kev313 wrote:

Is that "sophistication" element in your post a refrence to my earlier posts?

----------------

You mentioned the word but I guess you were kidding about it. But the "sophistication" claim has long been a staple of certain, not all, SET users, and continues to the present with "khornn." Many of these posts reek with the airs of the hoity-toity set.

[dodger]

----------------

On 5/2/2005 7:20:37 AM triode wrote:

Craig

PS Kev my fuse was kind of short yesterday for some reason. I reread the thread and think I may have taken you out a context a few times..... sorry! It just pisses me off that we can't just have a simple serious conversation about the different topologies. To me the subject is very interesting.

Craig has just now discovered that the common element in all of his disfunctional relationships is himself!

----------------

Triode:

The sarcasm and irritable tone of yesterday, will most likely have this pulled today.

It would be nice to have a rational discussion of topologies. But if you go to the beginning, Bob Crite posted "power requirements, D-Man and I were, I believe looking at the same brochure.

As Silversport was ignored yesterday, I quoted from the brochure page, paragraph heading and power requirement listed for a K-Horn. I don't cut and paste, but the three watt statement needs to be re-read As does the power requirements listed in that Brochure. There are no listed requirements.

My post reflects the language in there. The Dope from Hope is good. But it is not the primary advertising brochure. It contains much more data, but it's like the Biblical one must do enough to help themself - it's not in the Bible.

Just as in that one Brochure there are no minimum power requirements listed. That was ignored.

A lot of the sarcasm would be better as a PM.

I still support the idea that if the listener who pays for the equipment is happy, that's all that matters.

The discussion should go from that point and no-one would feel threatened or coerced.

[Speedball]

Hank and BailBonds.......the match for life. lol lol

[NOSValves]

----------------

On 5/2/2005 7:53:07 AM Speedball wrote:

Hank and BailBonds.......the match for life. lol lol

----------------

Great observation

[dodger]

Well this is peaceful.

Also number 250 and 3100 for me.

[Amy]

You know what?

I like pepperoni pizza, but my brother doesn't. We do not belittle each other for our different tastes. Well, maybe when we were in grade school.

[Deang]

Well, I for one I have real issues with your brother now.

[sunnysal]

paul´s posts just kill me;

"The unique perspective has a lot to do with the midrange, which is emphasized because the rest of the bands are so lacking. The compression is inevitable because 1 or 2 watts isn't sufficient to reproduce music without severely squishing it."

I think most people miss the humour in his grossly exaggerated posts. I , for one, laugh outloud as he baits everyone with these ridiculous statements. To claim all SET amps "emphasize the midrange because the rest of the bands are so lacking" would qualify him as a complete idiot if I did not know for sure he was baiting.

Generalization is perhaps the dumbest error anyone can commit in a debate, it completely paints the user into a corner from which they cannot emerge as they begin to have to battle the opponent´s retorts in the following manner ("oh yeah I know that there are 10-50 watt SET amps but I was only thinking of 2-6 watt low power SETs I just forgot to mention that"..."oh yeah I know there are plenty of SET amps with wider and flatter frequency responses then many SS amps, but I was only talking about the bad SETs and the good SS"..."oh yeah I know that 2 watts could be plenty in certain rooms, with certain music, on certain speakers BUT I was talking about most of the time, most rooms, my cousin vinny, etc.")

I thought the thread started off quite well, with people expressing thier preferences and thoughts, but it seems inevitable that some need to defend thier own amp choices decisions by demeaning or negating the decisions of others, sad really.

Those lucky enough to have highly efficient speakers have been able to audition and enjoy the various strengths and weaknesses of a variety of amplifier topologies and implementations. Most have found thier favorite one or two amp types and kept them around. Some of these people decided on low power SETs to enjoy thier music on thier systems. Forgive the pun, but more power to them! I have heard what people love about those "flea amps" and understand thier enthusiasm. I have gone with PP tubes because in my system that has given me the best results.

I wish I could audition all the amps out there on my system to give a definitive answer, but in the end I cannot and MOST IMPORTANTLY, it would only prove which amp I liked best in my room, with the rest of my system, with my music and my individual tastes. Anyone who tries to claim he has heard it all in his system is a LIAR, anyone who trys to teach me what would sound better in my system is a FOOL, he cannot know. I do however like to hear suggestions about things to try out in my system...suggestions mind you.

I am having back my friend with his krell next weekend, not for a shootout (we had that already) but to really try to figure out how to describe the differences between these two amps in my system. I liked them both last time, but liked my amp better in my system. We´ll see what happens.

Regards and enjoy the comedy farse as it unfolds on "SETs versus the world!"...tony

[seti]

I read over the past two years set vs pp threads in the archives which is not a short read and there isn't much difference from thread to thread.

I have never heard a 45 or a 2A3 or anything under 8wpc although I would love to. I have found it interesting that the arguments about set tend to lean toward the lower power set amps. What about the 211 and 845 has anyone auditioned these? I did notice the price tag seems to be higher for these tube amps.

I really enjoy my 300b amps and thats all that matters to me. I dig it.

Amy - tell your brother the peperoni pizza is useless without anchovies and jalapenos

[dodger]

When I was younger there was more of a balance. There was more thought in auditioning, to me there was some difference in quality.

We have changed. We settle for too little. Quality is no pun intended, mostly cheesy.

Yes, there used to be more sauce on pizzas. Now cheese is king. Evevn asking for extra, extra sauce only brings one to levels achieved years ago. It's too bad pizzas don't last. I would love some NOS NIB today.

[NOSValves]

----------------

On 5/2/2005 9:55:30 AM seti wrote:

I read over the past two years set vs pp threads in the archives which is not a short read and there isn't much difference from thread to thread.

I have never heard a 45 or a 2A3 or anything under 8wpc although I would love to. I have found it interesting that the arguments about set tend to lean toward the lower power set amps. What about the 211 and 845 has anyone auditioned these? I did notice the price tag seems to be higher for these tube amps.

I really enjoy my 300b amps and thats all that matters to me. I dig it.

Amy - tell your brother the peperoni pizza is useless without anchovies and jalapenos

----------------

Yes your right to a point most of the SET destractors around here are toward the lower watt offering but Class A, No feedback SET in and of itself has its own unique presentation no matter what the power output. It's a topology that does some things incredibly well and other things IMHO horribly. The higher powered SET amps relieve the horrible to just some what dismal. I'm sure now I will get blasted for my opinion but this opinion is based on sceintific, verifiable and repeatable fact and listening session not just one or the other. Is it wrong to like these amps? Heck no if you like it then that is fine with me.

Just to be balanced I personally don't prefer Class A, No Feedback, Triode Push Pull either for much the same reasons.

Craig

[SilverSport]

...thatz cuz your in New Yawk...come to Chicago and we'll show you what a Pizza should taste like...and it's not "sauce"...it's "gravy"...or as my friends over by Melrose say, "gravies."

Bill

This is where I would insert a smilie...

[sunnysal]

fools...FOOLS!...All gravys are sauces but not all sauces are gravys...tomato sauce is NOT a gravy...the world accepted authority on these issues Epicurious states:

SAUCE: A sauce is a thickened, flavored liquid designed to accompany food in order to enhance and bring out its flavor.

GRAVY: A sauce made from meat juices, usually combined with a liquid such as chicken or beef broth, wine or milk and thickened with flour, cornstarch or some other thickening agent.

PIZZA: Made popular in the United States by soldiers who brought the idea back from Italy at the end of World War II, pizza is thought to have evolved from early Egyptian flat bread. Literally translated, the word means "pie," but it has come to represent a round savory tart made with a crisp yeast dough covered with tomato SAUCE, mozzarellaa cheese and other ingredients.

HISTORY OF PIZZA: Pizza, like so many other foods, did not originate in the country for which it is now famous. Unless you have researched the subject, you, like so many people, probably always thought Pizza was strictly an Italian creation. The foundations for Pizza were originally laid by the early Greeks who first baked large, round and flat breads which they topped with various items such as olive oils, spices, potatoes and other things. Tomatoes were not discovered at that time or, very likely, they would have used them as we do today. Eventually the idea of flat bread found its way to Italy where, in the 18th century, the flat breads called "Pizzas", were sold on the streets and in the markets. They were not topped with anything but were enjoyed au naturel. Since they were relatively cheap to make, were tasty and filling, they were sold to the poor all over Naples by street vendors. The acceptance of the tomato by the Neapolitans and the visit of a queen contributed to the Pizza as we know and enjoy it today. In about 1889, Queen Margherita, accompanied by her husband, Umberto I, took an inspection tour of her Italian Kingdom. During her travels around Italy she saw many people, especially the peasants, eating this large, flat bread. Curious, the queen ordered her guards to bring her one of these Pizza breads. The Queen loved the bread and would eat it every time she was out amongst the people, which caused some consternation in Court circles. It was not seemly for a Queen to dine on peasant's food. Never the less, the queen loved the bread and decided to take matters into her own hands. Summoning Chef Rafaelle Esposito from his pizzeria to the royal palace, the queen ordered him to bake a selection of pizzas for her pleasure. To honor the queen who was so beloved by her subjects, Rafaelle decided to make a very special pizza just for her. He baked a Pizza topped with tomatoes, Mozarella Cheese, and fresh Basil (to represent the colors of the Italian flag: Red, white, and green). This became Queen Margherita's favorite pizza and when word got out that this was one of the queen's favorite foods, she became even more popular with the Italian people. She also started a culinary tradition, the Pizza Margherita, which lasts to this very day in Naples and has now spread throughout the world. History has not made it clear whether Rafaelle began to sell this creation from his own pizzeria but it is known that the Pizza, in much the same form as we now know it, was thereafter enjoyed by all the Italian people. Variations began to be made in different parts of the country. In Bologna, for example, meat began to be added into the topping mix. Neapolitan Pizza became quite popular and it brought garlic and crumbly Neapolitan cheeses into the mixture as well as herbs, fresh vegetables, and other spices and flavorings. About this time the idea of baking in special brick ovens came into existence and the bread, as it is today, was a rather simple combination of flour, oil, salt and yeast. Pizza spread to America, France, England and Spain, where it was little known until after World War II. While occupying Italian territories, many American and European soldiers tasted Pizza for the first time. It was love at first taste! Italian immigrants had been selling Pizzas in their American stores for some time, but it was the returning soldiers with a lust for the saucy delight that drew the Pizzas out of the quiet Italian neighborhoods into the main stream of city life all over the continent. In fact, the square "Sicilian Pizza" which is so popular and was the forerunner of the now well-promoted "Party Pizza" is an American invention. Real Sicilian Pizza has no cheese or anchovies.

So all you guys who think you KNOW pizza, HAH! I spit in your faces! Only I know what REAL pizza is about, miserable worms!

Tony

[seti]

I like the pizza that comes in a box from the store. Sometimes I have to knock the ice of the top but thats ok.

[Audio Flynn]

MOST IMPORTANTLY, it would only prove which amp I liked best in my room, with the rest of my system, with my music and my individual tastes.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Individual tastes are WIDELY varied. And all acceptable.

Realism to my taste is working to recreate 1981 Toronto outdoor New Wave concert I attended with 140,000 other people. I was 60 yards from the stage; with 3 stories of scaffolding for the PA speakers for 18 hours of concert.

Graham Parker

Rockpile

Pretenders

Talking Heads

B 52s

Elvis Costello

My system must have the realism to compell me to "pogo" to "whats so funny about peace love and understanding" in my boxer shorts on any given Saturday morning.

Not quite there yet.