Piercarlo said:
The theory of "last minute strange compromises" may be a good one. My elucubrations was made in the hipothesis of a quiet, savvy revision of the design. If you are right... then I may only discourage any buying of amplifiers (as of any others equipments) from this firm. First of all because a "last minute strange compromise" as this, plainly reported on schematics, don't allow further trusting on team design ability to cope safely with circuital problems! 🙁. An inspection of fisical construction for detecting "last minute" PHYSICAL correction is recommended! 🙁
Happy Xmas... despite of "last minute" odds! 😉
Piercarlo
Well like I said in post 13, It's probably just a drafting error. Since this has now been confirmed, that's the end of the theorising 🙂.
Just one thing in defence of my theorising; I’ve seen a few apparently nonsensical component value selections made to fix stability issues - Think of a complementary Darlington emitter follower, biased heavily into class A to give low-impedance drive to a (intended) high speed Class AB MOSFET output stage, but with 910R individual grid stopper resistors for the MOSFETS. Or a secondary differential amplifier added to increase open loop gain, but emitter degenerated to a gain of approximately unity………