In Reply to: Geez... posted by Ralph on October 15, 2024 at 08:23:07:
"BTW he didn't address the fact that for it to really be ultralinear, the taps have to be properly placed."Somehow you are missing what I said and what he said.
He never talks about a circuit that has the screen grids of the output tubes connected to taps on the output transformer. What you and I (and most everyone else) calls "Ultra-Linear". No where in the video does he address that in any way.
When he uses the term ultra-linear he means "limited Class A" where the amplitude of the input signal to the amplifier is limited to prevent the output tubes from operating in the non-linear cutoff region and the non-linear saturation region of the dynamic operating curve. The tubes are only permitted to operate in the center (the most linear part, straightest part) of the curve. What I simply call "properly executed Class A".
You and I talked about this type of tube operation by phone years and years ago. Your remark to me was "My amplifiers are not that kind of Class A".
"The graph you showed earlier was of a 6L6 whose transformer designer was dodging the patent or working from a design that did (out of 'tradition')."
I said, and it is true, that it doesn't matter where you place the taps, a pentode or a beam power tube ran in ultralinear is less linear than that same tube ran in triode mode. Also none of them, no matter how you operate them, are as linear as a directed heated triode.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 10/15/24
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Geez... - Tre' 19:01:27 10/15/24 (32)
- RE: Geez... - PakProtector 08:30:19 10/17/24 (3)
- RE: Geez... - Tre' 09:10:23 10/17/24 (2)
- RE: Geez... - PakProtector 03:58:27 10/18/24 (1)
- RE: Geez... - Tre' 20:54:34 10/18/24 (0)
- I got that - Ralph 09:02:45 10/16/24 (27)
- RE: I got that - Tre' 17:55:26 10/16/24 (26)
- So the patent says 43% when a 6L6 is used? nt - Ralph 08:29:11 10/17/24 (25)
- RE: So the patent says 43% when a 6L6 is used? nt - Tre' 09:02:35 10/17/24 (24)
- RE: So... - Ralph 09:19:32 10/17/24 (23)
- RE: So... - Tre' 09:27:24 10/17/24 (22)
- RE: 'substantially', 'equivalents' - Ralph 09:44:56 10/17/24 (21)
- So what is the correct % for a 6l6? - Tre' 10:22:32 10/17/24 (20)
- RE: So what is the correct % for a 6l6? - Ralph 11:13:37 10/17/24 (19)
- This says that you are wrong. - Tre' 12:49:58 10/17/24 (12)
- RE: No, it is consistent with the patent. - Ralph 13:30:47 10/17/24 (11)
- RE: No, it is consistent with the patent. - Tre' 15:54:52 10/17/24 (10)
- RE: No, it is consistent with the patent. - elblanco 18:53:18 10/17/24 (8)
- Thank you. - Tre' 06:58:53 10/18/24 (7)
- RE: Thank you. - Ralph 11:45:50 10/18/24 (6)
- RE: Thank you. - Tre' 15:49:47 10/18/24 (5)
- RE: Thank you. - Ralph 15:07:28 10/19/24 (4)
- RE: Thank you. - tube wrangler 22:59:14 10/27/24 (1)
- If you read the UL patent I think it says why :) nt - Ralph 11:35:44 10/28/24 (0)
- RE: Thank you. - Tre' 18:15:29 10/19/24 (1)
- I understand your logic - Ralph 11:11:57 10/28/24 (0)
- they are 18.5% imp. 43% turns...-.-nt - elblanco 18:50:28 10/17/24 (0)
- RE: So what is the correct % for a 6l6? - Tre' 11:53:46 10/17/24 (5)
- It should. nt - Ralph 13:27:55 10/17/24 (4)
- yep. nt - Tre' 16:46:59 10/17/24 (3)
- and bias, tapping , and load resistance all must work simpatico.. - elblanco 18:57:40 10/17/24 (2)
- and it originally comes from Blumlein...-. - elblanco 19:02:46 10/17/24 (1)
- RE: and it originally comes from Blumlein...-. - tube wrangler 19:20:39 10/31/24 (0)