Your most expensive amp repair
- Thread starter cooky1257
- Start date
Just had tears of laughter rolling down my face for the last 10 mins
Can't help thinking you killed the dog for pissing on your amp!!
Sorry just my sense of humour
paul auster
Banned
Pedant alert
One can easily look up the S.O.A.R data for the output devices and conclude that they are not suitable. I am referring here to the old M408 and M1008 from way back in time. I can't speak for any of the new Albarry models as I haven't seen the circuitry.
Hardly pedantic when your slagging of a company . Comments on forums help to establish reputations . And bleedin hell , you forgot to mention your comments were antiquated until now !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cereal Killer
432
Not the company, just the bad implementation of a component. I also owned a PP1 for a very short while, it is indeed a very coloured and odd product - IMHO.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
Hardly pedantic when your slagging of a company . Comments on forums help to establish reputations . And bleedin hell , you forgot to mention your comments were antiquated until now !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It just shows how differently we all think then.... It never occurred to me to think "I reckon I'll slag off Albarry"! To me it was just a little aside to the topic prompted by someone else mentioning them and no more than a statement of technical fact.
sq225917
Bit of this, bit of that
Paul, there's no way you could describe using a transistor outside of its safe operating area anything but dodgy. It's simply bad practice, that's why the manufacturers of the devices give a stated safe operating range.
All Jez would have to prove, ( if the world was full of tedious litigants with more money than sense that owned tiny hifi brands) was that what the designer did was considered unstandard or unsafe, which of course it is by very definition if the designer uses the parts beyond their stated safe operating area.
All Jez would have to prove, ( if the world was full of tedious litigants with more money than sense that owned tiny hifi brands) was that what the designer did was considered unstandard or unsafe, which of course it is by very definition if the designer uses the parts beyond their stated safe operating area.
I had a total loss amp story. In around 1970 I bought a Peak Sound amplifier from a London dealer. It had an intermittent fault in one channel and after hoping it would get better on its own I took it back to the shop, who told me that Peak Sound had gone bust so they could neither repair it nor replace it.
I took it to a local repair shop who said they would have a go at fixing it by going through the circuit with an Avo comparing good to bad channels. I left it with them and never saw the amp again since they seemed to disappear from the face of the earth too.
This is why I was such a fan of the new "supply of goods: Implied terms Act" when it arrived.
When one of my Goldmund mono amps failed Goldmund would only supply a complete board to the repairer which cost around £1000. He said Goldmund were most unhelpful and slow.
I took it back to the shop, who told me that Peak Sound had gone bust so they could neither repair it nor replace it.I took it to a local repair shop who said they would have a go at fixing it by going through the circuit with an Avo comparing good to bad channels. I left it with them and never saw the amp again since they seemed to disappear from the face of the earth too.
This is why I was such a fan of the new "supply of goods: Implied terms Act" when it arrived.
When one of my Goldmund mono amps failed Goldmund would only supply a complete board to the repairer which cost around £1000. He said Goldmund were most unhelpful and slow.