Stupendously Expensive Amplifier

I just stick to aural sex.

DC filament is a good idea.

In the 1970's guitar amplifier either used grounded CT on 6.3 V filament or a 6.3 V secondary, with a potentiometer across 6.3 V secondary and the slider grounded, so you could try to minimize the hum by adjusting the potentiometer.

Geloso used DC filament by rectifying the output tube filament 6.3 Vac and used this for input channel tube filament as well as output tube negative grid bias voltage.

IMHO Geloso guitar amplifier were quiet compared e.g. to Marshalls.

identify its 'sonic fingerprint'."

Another thing he was good at was naming things. This is actually called nul ling the input with the output. he also took other measurements when he dup licated the sound of those high end amps. But he was damngood at names. Son ic holography, he did what Polk did in their big speakers when they put an extra midrange in each, fed out out of phase from the other channel. That a djusted itself. Te holography just delayed the signal and sent it to the ot her channel out of phase. I might be learning ore about this soon because I have one coming in that actually had a problem with the holography circuit . I am sure it has a BBD and that is probably the problem.

Also, Carver had the ACCD, the Asymmetrically Coupled Charge Detector. That is a bunch of bullshit, all that hing did was to detect noise in the L-R o f an FM stereo signal and variably replace it with a slightly delayed L+R s ignal, giving it the illusion of being in stereo.

Don't get me wrong, I do not want to belittle the Man's accomplishments. He was a way better engineer than I could ever be. But what he named s*it did n't fit.

Well, if you'd just paid $1000 for a blue capacitor, you'd hear the difference too.

Cheers

Actually, it's brown with gold lettering.

Tat one is an astounding ninety nine cents. The one i see below seems to be the same amp at $199,999.99.... In either case, stupidity rules.

At $1000, green is BETTER...