Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] 6146 via 572b's

To: <k7fm@teleport.com>, <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] 6146 via 572b's
From: Gary Patterson <gpatterson53@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:01:42 -0400
List-post: <amps@contesting.com">mailto:amps@contesting.com>
agreed...   but not once was there mention of 6146's or 572b's

> From: k7fm@teleport.com
> To: gpatterson53@hotmail.com; amps@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] 6146 via 572b's
> Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 06:44:08 -0700
> 
> "how did this thread get it's title??   "6146 via 572b's"  what does it have 
> to do with the discussion?
> 
> Actually, the digression was normal and almost logical.  The original 
> question was regarding using a 10 watt 817 transceiver to drive an 
> amplifier.  Then, there was a discussion of different types of amplifiers 
> that could be driven with 10 watts.  This, of course, led to minor 
> digressions such as super-cathode amplifiers.  All normal for a diverse 
> group of radio nuts.
> 
> Further logical and normal digression led to a question of the 817 itself 
> and how it caused fatigue to the listener.
> 
> So, if you think this is a digression, remember, it could have digressed 
> into whether using orange gum drop capacitors was fitting to replace a black 
> beauty in that found 813 amplifier audio section, or one annual digression 
> is whether the amplifier power supply for the 817 should use a neutral and 
> dedicated common wiring in the old farmhouse.
> 
> We should be thankful the thread did not digress into women's hats.
> 
> 73,  Colin  K7FM
> 
                                          
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>