Patrick Turner wrote:
>
> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> "bassett" <bassett@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:48114809$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:67cp5jF2n8njcU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> .
>>>> **Let me re-state the situation:
>>>>
>>>> * Peter Stein is sup****ting and servicing products he manufactured. I
am
>>>> servicing and sup****ting ME and other products.
>>>> * There are others who service and sup****t ME products. Due to the
>>>> careful matching of semiconductors in all ME products, servicing the
>>>> output stages by anyone other than PS (or his appointed successor/s)
is a
>>>> real bad idea.
>>>> * Supplying schematics to anyone calling themselves a 'tech', in the
case
>>>> of ME, may be a very bad idea. Techs who are unable to perform even
basic
>>>> fault-finding, can end up doing far more damage to the amplifier.
>>>> * In the case of most ME models, the output stages are modular in
format.
>>>> This makes removal and replacement a quick, simple exercise. Peter
Stein
>>>> (and his appointed successors) can effect service to those output
modules
>>>> and the modules posted back, safely, inexpensively and easily.
Freighting
>>>> amplifiers around the nation is not required. All that is required,
is a
>>>> competent tech.
>>>> * I have seen many ME amplifiers which have been worked on by
incompetent
>>>> techs. The result is not pretty, nor cheap to rectify.
>>>> * Poorly serviced ME amplifiers reflect badly on the product's
>>>> reputation.
>>>>
>>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>>
>>> One would have thought or at least hoped that electronics' would have
>>> advanced, improved, or at the very least progressed to a point where
a 30
>>> year old design could be called dated, superseded or at the very
last
>>> 'outmoded' By modern technology, multi-layered chips, and modern
>>> manufacturing technique's
>> **I'll let you into a dirty little secret:
>>
>> * Amplifier topology (BJT) has not altered since 1965.
>> * MOSFETs and IGBJTs are the only new devices, necessitating new
topologies
>> to enter the market place. MOSFETs suck (sound-wise) and IGBJTs have
never
>> succeeded.
>> * Even so-called 'digital amplifiers' (aka: Class D) are not new. They
were
>> around several decades ago.
>>
>> There you go. No amplifier is significantly new, nor innovative. Peter
Stein
>> released his innovative products in 1976. They were and still are, very
>> different to almost every other product on the market.
>>
>>> At what point do you decide that up-dating, re-fitting, or simply
>>> replacing old components for new ones, is beyond the scope of
>>> transforming something into what you consider expectable or
comparable
>>> to a modern day design. and at the very least on a par with what is
>>> available today.
>> **I'll put a 1976 model ME up against any mass market product available
>> today.
>>
>>> Or have you also updated your Holden commodore, by removing the
starting
>>> handle out the front of the radiator, and while it might have been an
>>> advantage in the late fifties to have such a leg breaker, we now
have
>>> modern electronics' making your starting handle obsolete.
>> **I'd LIKE to update my Commodore to one or more of the following:
>> * Direct injection Diesel.
>> * Direct injection petrol.
>> * Hybrid Diesel/electric engine.
>> * Side curtain air bags.
>> * Stability programme.
>> * Etc.
>>
>> I can't because GMH don't make the technology able to be retro-fitted,
nor,
>> if it was, economically viable. At least Peter Stein ensures that his
>> customers can keep their products up to date. Which is more than can be
said
>> of Rotel, Yamaha, Marantz, Onkyo, Krell, etc.
>>
>>> In short we get to the point where a 30 year old design, is simply
>>> that, nothing more nothing less,
>> **ALL amplifier designs are at least that old.
>>
>> Of cause sup****ting something of that age does
>>> have considerable advantages, for one thing, nothing new needs to be
>>> learned, Old relics constantly breakdown, so an income can be assured
in
>>> your retirement years.
>> **I have news for you: Instead of throwing their amps away, ME owners
can
>> simply update them.
>>
>>> Of cause it could also be argued that a modern day design, would
simply
>>> not make it in this modern age, and there would simply be no need to
>>> start manufacturing new models as the dimini****ng market and the
>>> production costs would make anything new completely out of reach,
price
>>> wise to Jo Public, unless it was made in China, Korea or Taiwan,
and
>>> for that to happen schematic's would need to be supplied to the
factory
>>> of choice, with a undertaking that Chinese laws would need to change
to
>>> protect the Copyright's of such valuable do***ents
>> **That much is correct. The rest is just wrong.
>>
>> Trevor Wilson
>
> ME amps break down, just like everything else.
>
> Many people DO NOT WANT AN EXPENSIVE MODIFICATION.
>
> They just want it fixed, OK, no upgrades, right!
>
> So where are the ****en manuals to allow any capable tech to fix it
> quick and cheap??????
>
> Stop avoiding the issue Wilson.
>
> You are showing the world what an obstinate **** you are!!!!
>
> Patrick Turner.
Seems to me what we currently see from twevy is being afraid of manual
dispersion due to all and sundrey being given the op****tunity to
actually discover just how old and crap the me design has become in
relation to other more modern amps thus destroying the perpetration
( in his lunchbox) of thier "speshulness"
Wilson your a dick and if you tried this ****e in my trade you would
be finished in a week .Still no fear of that atm considering just how
thicke you have been proven
|
