Ah, Churchianity, I love it. We have it in Oz too, and it's BIG BUSINESS, preaching that wealth and ostentation is God's reward to a hard working, entrepreneurial flock...
I think Man is always looking for ideas to which he can hitch his star, and for which often he will fight to the death. The most recent has been the failed 70 year social experiment which crashed in 1989 - a great concept, but not the answer...
Has anybody observed the latest Messiah? It's called the Free Market and
that will fix everything, bring prosperity and good will to all. Just beware that you don't have oil in your back yard or oil off your nearest beach.
Re GNFB, has anybody actually tried the opposite? Now
there is a heretical thought. Oh no, it's not as crazy as it sounds. It's been done and yes, it works, in surprising ways. But use like you would salt, sparingly. Wouldn't use it in conjunction with negative loops as that would be counter productive.
I think of GNFB and NFB in general as suppressing an uprising and rebellion. You suppress it down hard and it just causes more nasties to pop up elsewhere and just gets more angry and aggressive as ever. It doesn't fix the problem unless you look at what caused the problem in the first place.
More on a technical level, NFB has so many unpredictable inter-actions with stuff like slew rate and vanishing headroom with increased bandwidth. I use your grey description often. In fact I used it here, read under the heading
Overview:
http://www.audiorevelation.com/cre/product_info.php?cPath=33&products_id=191 So what about PFB, or if "negative" matches the "back" in feedback, then what about positive feed
forward? PFF? Many topologies and certainly active devices have an inertia problem (my choice of words) as discussed by Hawksford (both Allen Wright and Terry Demol thinks of him highly). That is that any initial movement from a static point, that movement is likely to be non-linear or have a significant non-linear component. Positive feed
forward, PFF, may in fact, as kind of intimated by Hawksford, be an error correction. While he was mainly concerned with bi-polar action, I can testify that it is not just limited to that. So I am suggestion that make we make our choices to make an amplifier topology behave in a consistent linear manner... and then add a little... tastefully according to the ear??? Kind of a gentle nudge forward. Think of a car, the hardest job it has is to get of the line from a standing start, or stuttering start. A little auxiliary shove could help.
I am currently listening to a tube amplifier that has it switch-able in and out. It is quite audible. Low level details, image specificity and stability, clarity of soundstage and soundspace, all noticeably affected. Elson Silva has tried it too and liked it. His words, it make the amp sound "bigger". I know exactly what he means. The sound opens up. I also use it with great effect in I/V conversion in digital players and DACs. There are more to be tried...
Unlike NFB which has to be used in significant amounts to even be justified in the first place, PFF is used in tiny amounts and is unlikely to affect headroom, bandwidth or indeed stability margin. In a stable amp it seems perfectly safe at <2dB and in some cases <1dB is enough.
Now I will adopt a new middle name, maybe Arius? Getit?

Cheers, Joe