Tube amplifiers and interstage transformers

My experience is similar to Charles1dad's, in that my favorites are SET amps, especially 300B SETs. I've heard superb SETS with interstage transformer, and superb SETs with interstage cap.

Wavelength offers(I think,could be wrong) both IT and non IT versions of their excellent SET
amplifiers.I'd love to hear Gordon Rankin's opinion on how the two options
vary and why.
Regards,

Charles1dad, something that has puzzled me for a long time is the also 'common argument' that triodes are the most linear form of amplification known to man, yet they have more distortion??

The fact is that they don't. Try putting a transistor in a single-ended zero feedback configuration and see what happens :)

The 'common argument' is apparently false, and should be addressed where ever it appears.

We found that by adding feedback to our OTLs we could get the distortion down well below that of conventional transistor amps, but in doing so the amp also took on some of the sterile qualities (read: brighter, less musical) that are hallmarks of amps with feedback. We chose at that point (about 1980) to eschew feedback; if the speaker thus did not allow the amp to sound right on that speaker, the conclusion is that the speaker would never sound right with *any* amplifier! This has limited our market, but the upside is that if a person sets up the amp right its hard to beat.

SETs have a similar 'weakness' (although I regard it as a musical strength) on the same account.

Transistors 'measure better' on account of the fact that the 'measurement' has almost nothing to do with human hearing rules and are simple a method of making the amp look good on paper.

Thanks Atmasphere, I realized some time ago that the present measurement standards and the sound quality have hardly any correlation. In some ways to a degree it's almost an inverse relationship. Stereophile's JA measurements compare to Art Dudley's listening impressions is an example.Measurements do have a relevant use, they just aren't useful as a predictor of sound quality. I don't know why the laws of human hearing are'nt appreciated more and respected.
Regards,

I don't know why the laws of human hearing are'nt appreciated more and respected.

A lot of what we know about human hearing rules has only been worked out in the last 35- 40 years. But by 50 years ago, most of the understanding of how to analyze audio products was already in place. To get the really low THD specs you have to use feedback; when it was discovered that the human ear uses odd orders to detect volume (and also that trace amounts of odd ordered harmonic distortion is really irritating to the human ear), the fact that negative feedback was contributing to that became an 'inconvenient truth'; essentially the audio industry paid no attention and may have even swept the discovery under the carpet.

So for the last 45 years or so the spec sheet has told us nothing about how an amp sounds- in fact as you say may even show an inverse relationship to the sound of the product. But changing the way the audio industry does things is hard- there are a lot of companies that simply will not accept human hearing rules as important, even though they pay lip service.

The result is that audiophiles, no matter what they have read or heard from others (and no matter who those others are) have to audition things for themselves. You would think that the spec sheet would help in that purpose- what else could it be for??

Of course the issue is pursuit of the almighty dollar. Tube amplifier power is more expensive than transistor power and high efficiency speakers are more expensive than low efficiency speakers. But the hype is that the cheaper transistors and lower efficiency speakers are somehow better because of the 'specs'! Whatta world!