wrote in message
ups.com

Further, the suggestion by Mr. Krueger that there is
something fundamentally amiss with the article or the
reviewers is similarily off the mark, because if you
actually deal with the contents of the article, you find
that it makes reaonable sense: solid state amplifiers
clip differently than tube amplifiers, and for a variety
of reasons.

I raised a specific issue which Mr. Pierce you appear to have intentially
deleted from the post of mine you quoted in your attempt to make it look
like I hadn't read the paper:

"One problem I've noticed with (Hamm's paper) is that it compared the
large-signal distortion of amplifier stages with differing gains. Since the
stage gains differed, the output signals differered dramatically in terms of
amplitude. Hamm thus built his case against SS on the fact that simple SS
amplifier stages tend to have higher stage gain than triode tubes.

As far as the claim that tube and SS amps have differing clipping
characteristics, this is not a given. If this comparison is to be made then
the amps should be as similar as possible, differering *only* in the fact
that one has active devices are tubes and the other has active devices that
are SS.

IOW the amplifiers being comapred should have similar or indentical coupling
and impedance-matching circuitry, simliar or identical kinds of and amounts
of stage gain, overall gain, and NFB, etc. Of course the amplfiiers should
also be based on good design practices.

Both Graham and I have pointed out that Hamm's paper fails to be a true
apples-to-apples comparison of tubed and SS amplifiers on these grounds.
Even if only the clipping characteristics of the equipment were compared,
then the comparison needs to be as close as possible. I see no evidence that
Hamm attempted to hold the relevant parameters as close as reasonably
possible. Therefore, even with the narrow criteria related to clipping
behavior that is stated above, the Hamm paper should have never passed
review by the JAES review board, if it was ever reviewed.

In case the meaning of my comments above is not obvious, any well-designed
power amp is going to be well-biased, have good audio bandwidth and
respectible amounts of NFB whether local or global.

Since the presence of audio transformers introduces many complex factors,
they would likely be eliminated from the SS and tubed equipment that would
be compared.

With these parameters held constant, both tubed and SS amps produce
respectible and very similar square waves when clipped.

Therefore, a study of the audible significance of differences in the
clipping performance of tubed and SS equipment becomes of limited
signficance in an true scientific apples-to-apples comparison. Hamm's paper
didn't represent good science, or good art and should have never been
published in the JAES except as a an example of poor-quality work.