tube amps and electrostatics

I recieved an email from Rodger. (below in parentheses)

Roger Sanders ESL and amp guru is not one to get into heated debates on forums, this is why he has presented his white paper on the subject as simply as he knew how, so it can do the talking for those who can understand it.
So if this is wrong by anyone, a white paper should be done by the "one" who has the so called "knowledge" to oppose it. So he can also be then be also laid bare for all the audio community to view, like Roger has done with his white paper.

"Hi George,
I completely agree with your assessment of the tubes vs. transistors controversy among audiophiles.
Transistor amps are the only type that can produce linear frequency response and high output when driving ESLs. But getting audiophiles to understand and believe the technical reasons why this is so is difficult. You have your work cut out for you -- but I support you 100%.

I hope that posting my white paper will help some audiophiles gain a better understanding of amplifiers. I do not have the time to post on forums. And in any case, I am not interested in getting into arguments with audiophiles. So I will not be making any posts.
However, any interested individual may feel free to contact me directly if he has any questions."

Great listening,
-Roger"

Cheers George

Autoformers cost more than many speakers themselves. That's a factor to consider in the equation that can't be ignored.

Ralph & Bruce & Mapman, thanks very much for the nice words.

Frogman, great post! I agree completely. Richness, body, and dimensionality are terms I find myself using frequently, I believe in the same sense as you are using the terms fullness and image density. And although I can't formulate a meaningful technical explanation, and I suspect that a good explanation would be a complex one involving a multitude of factors, my perception over the years has been that there is a tendency for those qualities to often be compromised in systems that are designed and assembled in a manner that results in flat frequency response being a leading priority.

Best regards,
-- Al

"And although I can't formulate a meaningful technical explanation, and I suspect that a good explanation would be a complex one involving a multitude of factors, my perception over the years has been that there is a tendency for those qualities to often be compromised in systems that are designed and assembled in a manner that results in flat frequency response being a leading priority. "

I'll offer up this wonderful resource again here to help with that.

Audio Chart

Factor in the ear sensitivity curves to help account for why flat may be technically correct but not sound best.

Beside Roger Sander answer above in my last post which the non believers are conveniently blind to.
Here is and excerpt from the Stereo Times review of the difference when driving the Quad ELS2805 (while still hard to drive are easer than most ESL's) using tube then good solid state. Which also backs up everything Roger said in his White Paper and I've been saying and heard.

Stereo Times:
"The Quads are not as easy a load as one would be lead to believe by how good they sound with tube amplification. The Magtech further revealed the tube shortcomings (which I had already noticed) by expanding the peak performance range of the Quads. The “sweet region” grew to the limits of the speakers themselves. Meaning they suddenly didn’t have extended bass but what they did have was tighter and more refined. The top end was not more extended, just smoother and less brittle. The Magtech amplifier did not create new loudspeakers; it just let them be all that they could be."

Cheers George