Okay, it's not growing so fast now -- I moved it from indoors under lights, to out in the cold over a month ago -- but the possibility of taking a cutting shouldn't be too far off. And you're right, it could still have that sort of vigor and be tetraploid. As it gets older, I hope for more clues. Of planned crosses with Saint Nicholas, 11 are now little plants, having survived infancy without sickness. I used mixed pollens, so I can't tell which are which yet, except for the mossy-looking ones (Salet, or *maybe* Chapeau de Napoleon). Most of the others look varying degrees of Damask, and most are probably from Pickering FS, but some may have to bloom before I can be sure which pollens took. There are also at least 5 Autumn Damask seedlings which look like they'll make it, and so much OP Single Musk that the culling process is ongoing. About thirty OP Grandma's Hat also germinated, but over 90% were sickly and/or misshapen. I don't know whether they're sickly because GH selfs badly, or whether GH makes sick babies regardless of the pollen used, but its promising start has definitely tarnished. One seedling of Tuscany Superb looks like it will make it. About thirty plants, all told. Others mostly haven't felt like germinating yet, if at all. No thanks to the squirrels, my dinky Saint Nicholas pretty much saved the year. I wish I had more of it! Since none of those seedlings can be expected to bloom this year, I'm now planning a bunch more F1s. And I have to say, the closer spring gets, the more I'm tempted to try an alternative direction, which I think aligns with yours. Although I absolutely will keep working on Damask Perpetuals, I realize that the odds of getting one to rebloom are low, and that even having a fine seed parent for them, might not be enough to make future breeders want to risk trying it. Chinensis rebloom is just SO much more within reach. So this year I'm hedging my bet, and will also try my hand at (gasp!) Hybrid Perpetuals. Breeders will include, to be sure, Alfred Colomb, Ardoisee de Lyon, "Barbara's Pasture Rose," Eugene de Beauharnais, Gloire des Rosomanes, Jacques Cartier, Reine des Violettes, Rose du Roi (of commerce), Salet (again), and Sydonie. It *may* include too modern Hugh Dickson, too sickly La Reine, or too sterile "Glendora." The basic idea will be the same -- boost female fertility in old roses -- but I would want to keep up the outcross-backcross process indefinitely, with the goal of bringing successive generations closer to the ancient European classes, and farther away from HPs. Early on, they might still be useful for breeding Bourbons, HPs, Austin types, or species crosses. So expect the next batch to include things like: Saint Nicholas x Reine des Violettes Gloire des Rosomanes x Saint Nicholas Tuscany Superb x Alfred Colomb Hebe's Lip x Jacques Cartier (When looking for some other information, I came across and re-read a Paul Barden blog from 10 years ago, in which he wished for something virtually identical to Indigo, which had just enough chinensis in it to ease the breeding of (at least slightly) remontant offspring. Although he intended to try it using Modern Shrubs and a different breeding methodology, the basic idea is the same. I'm using old roses for that job in an effort to restrict how modern descendants can look and smell, since glossy foliage and some other modern traits are dominant. While either approach could work, I'm hoping mine will quickly produce some useful results, since I don't feel quite young enough to try Paul's method for this particular job, and don't have the acreage to rush it.) Last year's Damask Perpetuals will be going on as before -- Pickering, Pink Leda, Autumn Damask, Duchess of Portland -- with Indigo and another Pickering plant joining the effort. Hebe's Lip will be getting a lot of pollen, as I suspect it's where SN got its female fertility from. Every year I try a few long shots, using tiny amounts of pollen from functionally sterile roses on my best seed parents, and will continue doing so. (Though it's way too early to be sure, one of my SN seedlings looks like it could be from Duchesse de Rohan pollen I put on it; it has foliage as oval as any of my Autumn Damask seedlings, but far less thorns. After years of failing with roses like that, this gives me hope!) My Single Musk is much happier lately, so it can expect a bunch of pollens, mainly directed at the moschata x gallica needed for a Damask do-over. If you like, I'll put some Gloire des Rosomanes pollen on it too, and send you any hips which result. If there's anything you'd love to see tried with things which I grow, and I've mentioned no intention of doing such crosses, let me know. Some of my roses, like Gloire des Rosomanes, will have a lot more flowers than I will have plans for.

"Overall, the valve (tube)is still an almost mystical thing, but in all honesty, modern amplifiers using transistors or MOSFETs are so vastly superior in terms of fidelity, efficiency and reliability, that I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Having said this, I was using a valve preamplifier on my own system until recently." --from Rod Elliot---I recommend his site on all questions related to audio. There is no doubt that valves do have some very nice characteristics, and for guitar amplifiers there are few guitarists who would argue otherwise. Guitarists love the sound of soft clipping that tubes make, rather than the harsher sound of over-driven MOSFETS or transistors. A soft overload behavior means that a valve amp does not sound as harsh as a transistor amp when it is overdriven - which is great for guitar, but a hi-fi should never be overdriven anyway, so the point is moot. The problems that befall valves are many, and include Fragile - The glass envelopes are very thin, and are easily broken. Limited Life - Even if a valve is operated well within its ratings, it still has a finite life. The main causes of valve failure are cathode emission degradation (happening all the time), and gas, when small amounts of air "break" the full vacuum. Microphonics - All valves tend to be slightly microphonic, which is to say that they act as a microphone. This can cause additional colouration to the signal if the sound from speakers vibrates the amplifier. High Voltage - Having to ensure that the 600V DC typical of a high power amp does not "flash over" valve bases is a constant headache, and ensuring that these voltages are kept well away from small fingers is mandatory. High voltage capacitors are also more expensive than lower voltage ones. Heaters - Valve cathodes must be operated at the correct temperature so they emit electrons properly, and "boil off" contaminants. If the heater voltage is too low, the cathode will become poisoned, and the valve is useless. The heater power used is all wasted, in that none of it is turned into sound. Output Transformers - The output transformer for a valve amp is expensive, bulky and heavy. It introduces its own distortion components, which are difficult (or impossible) to eliminate completely. Heat - All valve amps run hot. The valve will not work unless it is hot, and the heat causes problems for other components, shortening their life. The heat is all wasted energy. Damping - Valve amplifiers nearly all have a low damping factor, caused by a relatively high output impedance. Speakers must be very well damped indeed to work well with any valve amp, or the bass will become poorly defined, and crossover networks (which rely on a very low amp impedance) may not work as well as intended. On the positive side, valve amplifiers have a "warm" sound, partly because of the low order harmonic distortion introduced and because of the much higher impedance level compared to solid state. A good valve amp will also have a very wide bandwidth, and will have an easy job driving loads that cause solid-state equipment to have severe heartburn (or just blow up on the spot). But then again, how many people own 2 ohm speakers. Personally, I would never buy a speaker that is so poorly designed that it required a special amplifier. At low listeneing levels, valve equipment has vanishingly small distortion levels, and when all is said and done, there is something nice about little glass tubes, with little lights inside, making your music. But watt for watt, dollar for dollar, and if accuracy of incoming signal is of your highest importance, buying tubes are definitely not the way to go. Robert Carver has built solid state amps (with a so-called niceness and warmth switch) that tube-heads couldn't tell the difference from. But if you get you your stereo info from expensive retailers, true-believers, and Stereophile-type magazines rather than acoustic and electrical engineers you are likely to be led down the path of subjectivism, rather than objectivism. The repair rate and replacement rate of tubes is so far greater than solid state devices it is ridiculous. Unless you live in very cold weather and need the extra heat--go solid state:-) We all know that heat is the enemy of electronics. That is why heat sinks and fans exist. Krell, Meridian, Levinson, are all solid state and they are generally considered to be the Rolls Royce of the industry. In the age of DSP's and amplifier impedance output adjustment it makes almost no sense for tube amps for the average audiophile and every listener. But if you love the look of glowing tubes and don't have kids with prying hands, go ahead and buy one. Greg

Old thread, but hoping someone can please add me to the facebook group. We're considering Paradigm Conquest in Tower and looking to see more photos and hear feedback. We have Agreeable Gray on our walls throughout and are thinking it might be too warm. Also considering Kingship, but can't find anything on this color.

I follow a lady on instagram who used Citadel and it looks good https://www.instagram.com/stories/highlights/18088065226215473/