I finally got around to scanning an old journal article by John K. Hilliard I felt some of you might find interesting.
OK, my thread title was a hook. You can decide for yourself after reading the article.
I know the subject can be a sensitive one for some, and I don't expect anyone to make any changes of philosophy or preference based on this article. With that in mind, I'll refrain from personal comment other than a reminder to keep in mind the date of publication (1946), and the relative stages of development at that time of the tube types discussed.
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill12.jpg
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill22.jpg
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill32.jpg
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill42.jpg
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill52.jpg
http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid/hill62.jpg
I'd suggest that anyone finding this of interest download a copy of the higher-resolution pdf (right click and save target as...), since I have no idea how long I'll be able to keep it posted online.
I debated posting this awhile, knowing that if very many triode lovers got converted, the price of my preferred tubes might soar. Then it dawned on me I already have more tubes than I'll burn up in my remaining years, so who cares. Kinda one of those "I don't play golf, but I'm glad you do" things...
