MC phono stage without transformer?

Dear Ron: +++++ " . For me, the more a component lets me forget about hifi, gives sense to music and touch me emotional the better I find component.... " +++++

I share with you totally this statement: that is all about!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Viper and friends: I posted somewhere:

+++++ " The SUT is an old patch for bad SS phonopreamps designs and for the inherent limitations on tube phonopreamps for handle low output MC cartridges. It is a " cheap solution to a complex problem ".

There is no synergy between low output MC cartridges and tube phono preamps and less than that there is no synergy between SUT's and quality music sound reproduction.
The problem is not on your phono preamp the problem is in that you buy the wrong cartridge for your phono preamp. Your phono preamp is for high output MC cartridges and MM cartridges. " +++++

and here this link: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1138829438&openflup&41&4#41

The SUT subject has many " sides " to analize/comment.IMHO to understand why people like Atmasphere, I and some other people speak in that way it is a must to undertstand what happen ( which hard " road/process " most pass the cartridge signal ) for the cartridge signal goes to the amplifier/speakers with out noise/distortions/colorations and almost intact and truer to the recording, these means with almost no degradation at all!!!.

Through my music and audio life I learn many many things like what to do and what not to do ( on many subjects ), I learn too through the professional magazines like TAS, STPHILE, etc, etc and I learn from them for what they say but for what they don’t say too! I always try to learn ( every single day and from any where. ) on what is my passion: music and home music reproduction.

I already state many times the paramount importance in the Phonolinepreamp ( that only a few people agree with ) I have to understand why is so important? What is the main work of that item? What happen inside it? What does not must happen inside it? And many other questions.

What happen with that tiny/fragile cartridge signal ( LOMC or any other ) when goes inside a Phono and line stage?, first the signal has to be amplified ( in some cases , very low output ) almost 10,000 times before could be amplified for the system’s amplifier, 10,000 times!!!

This Phonolinepreamp work is a “ tour du force “ because that amplification level must be with out any signal contamination of every kind: RFI, EMI, noises, distortions, colorations, etc, etc, how to do it with so tiny/fragile signal level? Well this is the first challenge that the designer has to understand and try to handle it.
How to do it with almost no degradation on the cartridge signal? How to do it making that the cartridge signal be always truer to the recording? How to do it with a minimum signal “ manipulation/handle” ? well these are our design challenge.

Second the cartridge signal must pass a very critical stage where that signal can suffer a heavy degradation if you don’t take care, I can say extremely care: inverse RIAA curve equalization where the signal ( in a simple explanation way ) must have around 20 db of boost on the bass octaves and 20db lowering in the high frequencies, after this process the signal have a flat frequency response that will be amplified at the line stage and final in the amplifiers.
This is a lot more easy to say that to do it with accuracy. What I mean with accuracy? Well that the phono stage RIAA curve be a mimic ( inverse one ) of the RIAA curve with which the recording was made, any deviation in the phono stage RIAA curve makes that the reproduced “ sound “ be far away from the recording and what we want is to be near and truer to the recording!!!

Because the RIAA eq. is not linear but a curve any single deviation at any single frequency “ disturb/degrade/ have an effect on almost three music octaves, this kind of RIAA eq. deviations makes and create distortions and colorations in the cartridge signal, distortions and colorations that are not on the recording: so the target here is to conserve intact that tiny/fragile signal with out no RIAA eq. deviations.
That’s why I always say that a good Phono stage must be ( at least ) at no more than 0.05db deviation from 20hz to 20Khz.
My Phonolinepreamp is calibrated to achieve a RIAA deviation of no more than 0.015db, this figure could make a difference? no doubt about. I’m not a measurements item lover but at the RIAA eq. accuracy is the name of the game other things equal.

As you can see the cartridge signal can/could suffer a heavy degradation through the phono and line stages, more than in other analog links. So we have to take care of that cartridge signal in a way that can/could suffer a minimum degradation.

We need that the cartridge signal pass for the SHORTEST “ road “ before the amplifier/speakers/room final stages, because in any single stage ( phono stage, line stage, phono stage connectors, line stage connectors, IC phono to line stages cable, etc, etc ) the signal suffer a different type level degradations that alter the original signal and that puts a lot of “ veils “ between the signal and you ( your ears music signal perception ), in any single stage/link we are “ loosing “ part of the signal that we can’t recovery ever and at the same time we are adding distortions/colorations that was not on the original signal.

We take in count all these subjects in the design that’s why my system unit has the phono stage and the line stage integrated on the same unit ( we don’t degrade the cartridge signal through a lot of additional stages: phono stage connectors, input line stage connectors, IC cable, etc, etc, SUT, SUT connectors, SUT IC, ) .

We don’t only take care of the Phono stage design but we take care ( with the same “ passion “ ) to the line stage design because the cartridge signal always must pass through it and here the signal could suffer additional degradation.
As you can see ( again ) to have a well designed Phonolinepreamp is a complex task. There are many other critical subjects on the design, please let me explain only one more:

It is not only important to have 0.015 db on RIAA deviation but most important is to maintain it over any playing condition!!!!: all electronic parts ( transistors/valve/resistors/capacitors ) change its performances with temperature changes, this means that if we don’t care about that RIAA deviation can change with changes in the item running temperature ( high distortions and colorations ).

Now, to introduce a SUT ( internal/external ) put several additional " veils " between you and the reproduced cartridge signal, those " veils " from different kind and with differente range level of distortions/colorations/omissions/additions/etc/etc.

So, why too many people use SUT's?, well it is a cheap solution, it is more easy to design with SUT that to make a high gain active Phonolinepreamp design ( SS or tube one ): a lot lot easy!!!!

But that: lot lot easy!! means too: a lot lot degraded sound against the very high quality performance of a well active high gain Phonolinepreamp, no doubt about!!!

The very SAD subject on this " history " is ( like in this thread ) that many un-informed ( non-knowhow ) people not only accept the SUT's but support it when the SUT's goes against the quality sound reproduction in any audio system and not only this but that acceptance send a very clear/precise " message " to the Phono Stage designers/builders: EVERYONE IS SATISFIED WITH THE POOR SUT's PERFORMANCE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE CARE ABOUT TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY PERFORMANCE OF OUR PRODUCTS !!!!, because you have to know that all those SUT's builders/designers know what they produce.

Of course that to achieve a high quality sound reproduction through a non SUT based design has a price ( $$$$ ) to pay, no doubt about and of course that you have to choose what do you want, what performance level do you want, what quality sound reproduction level do you want and of course too that not all the people have the money or the same high level performance priorities and that's is another reason why exist the SUTs.

Regards and enjoy the music.
raul.

Dear Swampwalker/Rccc: I agree with both of you because ( as I point it out in my post ) the subject of price is an issue and not everyone can afford an expensive solution even if it is a lot better one.

Anyway, things are that I would like that instead that the analog industry stay making noise about the new SUTs ( that IMHO don't bring any good to the music reproduction and stop the growing up area. ) it will be better that that noise was on the " news " about Phonolinepreamps that could bring several improve steps in our analog perfection quest performance.

It is a SHAME ( for me ) that the Editors of Stereophile/TAS and the like don't do nothing about when their reviewers support with a very high enthusiams the SUTs, how can we ( the analog industry ) grow up? how the designers/builders of active high gain stages ( like Atmasphere, dartzeel, Doshi and many others ) could go to lower prices when the people that are wealthy goes too for the SUTs because a little non know-how about and too much of those professional reviewers that support it?

I'm in favor of better an affordable quality performance for all of us and of all us can/could help for that happen but not like in the SUT case where almost everyone: customers, reviewers and audio dealers forgot a little about quality for business and I think that we can have both quality/business at the same time.

Well it's enough about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Ron: In my case ( as I already posted on other threads ) I have in deep experiences with Audio Note whole products ( from the Ongaku through speakers, cartridges, SUTs, etc, etc ) due that the distributor here is a close friend of mine. I tested it ( SUTs ) in a whole audio Note system and in my system too.
I already owned almost every single ( top named ) SUT out there including Expressive Technology one.

I can asure you that I know exactly what I'm talking about, please don't have any doubt on the subject.

+++++ " a high class MM tube phono stage and a high performance step up leave the music more intact than any phonostage I know (ASR, ARC, Gryphon...). " +++++

I respect your opinion but like you say " that any phonostage you know ", well you don't know every one and certainly not the best integrated units ( tube or SS ): Phonolinepreamps that are the ones that I reference about quality performance against any SUT.

+++++ " with a lot of highly acclaimed components I heard. For instance the highly regarded ASR Basis exclusive. It was a big disappointment. " +++++

IMHO ( an no quibes against ASR ) " highly regarded " for people that does not care or does not know too much about music, that design is based on op-amps and can't represent a standard to compare with it.

Ron, till you hear the right Phonolinepreamp ( SS or tube one ) you are ( with all respect to you ) " out of base " trying to support the SUTs ( including what you own ) against a well designed active high gain Phonolinepreamp.

Ralph, some other people ( including me ) can do it because we have an in deep experiences about, maybe I'm wrong but at least I already try it.

You have to look to have the opportunity to test it and maybe after that you could think in a different way, you like me have the every day opportunity to learn something about music sound reproduction best quality performances.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Kirk: +++++ " Now I understand and respect a design approach that tolerates a mismatch here to acheive other objectives, but in terms of noise performance for i.e. a 5-ohm phono cartridge, a well-executed transformer/autoformer input topology will ALWAYS perform best. " +++++

I have to disagree with you here because IMHO that depends on the design, that btw we don't tolerate any mismatch at any single level " to achieve other objectives ".

+++++ " NOT deliver their best noise performance when coupled directly to an input stage, especially one that uses JFETs... " +++++

here I agree with you.

+++++ " There is simply too much variation in cartridge design and manufacturing methods to be able to allow EVERY cartrige to work its best with a single type of phono preamp .. " +++++

again it depends on the design.

+++++ " And finally, the biggest issue with improper cartridge loading has very little to do with the transformer or the lack thereof, but with the lack of standards and consistency among cartridge manufacturers... " +++++

that's another reason why the SUTs are not the best way to go.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Eldartford: +++++ " But the problems which plague power output transformers hardly exist for tiny signal transformers. " +++++

How is that? could you explain about?, maybe I'm missing something and I want to tell you that I not only owned several ones but I was a SUT's fanatic/devotee till I " learn ".

There are two areas ( frequency extremes range ) where the SUT degradation are totally audible ( very special on bass. ) against a well active device design and I'm talking here of that " tiny signal ", at least that is my experiences about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Ron: I made some research about your audio system items to " figure " ( in some way. ) what are you hearing and why you prefer a SUT.

There are not too much info on your amp but other model where I read that its output impedance is around 4 Ohms, the reviewer write: +++++ " In any event, these values will have a significant audible effect on the amplifier's performance " ++++++

Certainly had an audible effect with almost any speaker and yours has a 4 Ohms nominal impedance that could mean ( I hope I have the real Iroise electrical impedance curve. ) that maybe goes lower than that.

Those facts ( amplifier impedance output and electrical speaker impedance ) tell me with out any doubt that the reproduced sound can/could be heavy " colored " ( for say the least ) due to that impedance mistmatch and in some way to intermodulation speaker distortions due that its crossover ( woofer ) is on the high ( very ) 1200hz range.

It is probably too that the real inverse RIAA eq. deviation on your Preamp ( that makes a paramount difference in the quality performance. ) is bigger than 0.5 db ( maybe around 1 db. ), this can/could tell me that here the reproduced sound is/comes highly full of colorations and we have to remember too that the signal pass through a SUT where exist additional signal degradation.

Now, I understand that those colorations ( any audio system have in high/low manner. ) are the best for you ( nothing wrong with that ) but that could does not means is " correct " against what is on the recording or to a live event.

I prefer like you that an audio system be " emotional " ( just like music is. )but I like at the same time that have at least to other " vitues " : neutrality ( not analytical ) and " credible " whole tonal balance from top to bottom.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Eldartford: I owned Audio technica AT 1000T ( similar to the Signet. ) that had that spec but ( like the Signet ) with out any reference about deviation from flat, that btw it is almost imposible to been flat.

+++++ " I used several MC preamps without a transformer, but I never heard any sonic improvement. " +++++

There are some things why you or any one can't hear differences or improvements and even bad experiences about: one is that the own system colorations preclude to hear it, other could be that what you heard was not a good MC phonolinepreamp design, other could be a non-synergy system audio items, bad set-up, etc, etc.

I hope that in a near future you can have the opportunity to experience the right active high gain Phonolinepreamp, in the mid time you and me will enjoy what we have.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Ron: As I posted I made a little of research on your audio items just to " imagine " what are you hearing but for what you told here your music/sound reproduction is far from what I can " imagine ", good.

+++++ " If I see how a lot or maybe the majority of music is record today, it makes me wondering how the high-end community is fixed so much on the terms of neutrality and correctnes when the software itself is not neutral or correct to the original sound. " +++++

This is absolutely right and that's one of the reason that we have to be on the neutral/natural side of the music/sound reproduction trying to lower at minimum the colorations/distortions/noises on our systems.

+++++ " But I've heard a lot of stuff that was sure technologically superior but it made "sound" instead of music. " +++++

I agree with you here too, but what if you develop/create an audio system that not only measure good ( accurate not analitycal. ) but that give you the feeling/emotion of the music? would you be happy?, well this is one of my quest in my audio system music/sound reproduction targets.

Ron, I'm sure that you are enjoying your system's performance and maybe what I posted could help you to think and try to improve it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Kirk: Good luck and success with your design.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear John: +++++ " No doubt Raul genuinely cares for everyone here to enjoy the music but such a comment implies that his way is ultimately the only way to improve the system. " +++++

Certainly not, there are many " roads " to arrive Rome ( this is what the people here in Mexico say: something like a " slogan " I don't know the right word. ).

As you can read in this thread an else where different people have different aproach for the very same target ( who achieve in a better way? that's up to you after hearing those different " approaches ". ). I read ( in deep ) everything about Elliot's WV designs ( I owned the SA-2 and heard many times even in my home the 9/11 designs. I respect M. Elliot for its contribution over the years to the audio high end industry, no doubt about. ) where I can't find nothing that can/could tell me that the SUT solution is the right way to go, what I read is that he chooses that " road " that he must to believe on it against other " roads " ( something curious: in the website we can read everything including almost all design specifications but the must critical: RIAA eq. deviation, that is IMHO of paramount importance and one of the reasons why the Phono stages exist. ). Btw, one thing that will be important on that website is to tell us with which audio system ( better yet: on which different audio systems. ) he made the SUTs voicing.

Any " road " you choose has trade-offs ( till today nothing is perfect ), many times not because inherent design but for limitation performance on some parts ( either SS or tube devices ), the better you choose those trade-offs the better quality performance you can achieve.

M. Elliot speaks about the problems ( trade-offs ) to design with Jfets/tube ( input ) devices ( that's why he goes for SUTs. ) but other people ( like Ralph ) find out and fix those troubles ( from his point of view ) in its whole balanced/differential approach very different from Elliot's one.

I ( we ) decided that the best " road " to make justice to an MC low output cartridge ( and inverse RIAA eq ) is SS way and not only that but the best amplifier devices ( here ) are bi-polar transistors ( not Jfet/ Mosfet. ), we take a very " hard " road ( and the people with the in deep electronic design know-how could understand what I mean about. ) to do it: bipolar are a " pain in the ass " surrounded with a lot of operation issues ( that's why almost no one choose them on this particular item designs. ) but if you fix those " issues " IMHO is truly very good road for a whole Phonolinepreamp design.

I respect any single design out there and the fact that I don't agree with their designs whole approach does not means are not totally valid for other people.

There are many " miles " to go on in the Phonolinepreamp whole future designs, the good news is that there are some people/designers who cares about quality performance on music reproduction and this could means that we have to wait for real improvements about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Eldartford: +++++ " My experience suggests that, at an "affordable" price point a step-up transformer makes sense. " +++++

IMHO more than " make sense " : " you have no choice ".

I'm always against " mediocrity " and very special on music reproduction at any link/level on the audio chain. You know, José, Guillermo and I choose to design a Phonolinepreamp/tonearm not just for fun but because we think and our experiences tell us that the most critical links ( all links are important, no doubt about ) in the analog rig are the Phonolinepream and the tonearm ( other than the cartridge it self ) and what is out there don't fullfill my music reproduction targets/priorities in the best way.

I already posted that I would like that everyone could have the opportunity to buy the best Phonolinepreamp ( no SUTs ) ( SS tube or what ever ) at an affordable way but how all of us could " dream " with that when the message to the audio industry is that SUTs are ok.

Here I want to say that it is fully regrettable that many " professional " reviwers support that wrong SUT approach ( at least for me ).
I can understand that many of us are in favor of the SUTs but people like AD or MF or many other is out of question, these " proffesionals " are loosing respect ( like reviewers ) from many of us that with buying those magazines mantain it.
Today many of them ( IMHO )make more harm that good to the whole high end development audio industry and we all will be " paying " for it sooner or latter.
Many of us are only spectators where we can/could be protagonist in many ways other that buy audio items.

+++++ " but what is the reason that you put such great importance in exact RIAA equalization. There are no loudspeakers which have the kind of frequency response which you claim is essential ... " +++++

well, if I take that approach that " why bother for the RIAA deviation ( or other link accuracy ) when through the whole audio chain are greater ones " then my and your system were full of " colorations/distortions " that put us not closer to what is on the recording but far away. I try to put at minimum the distortions/colorations/noises in every single link in the audio chain and I think you do it the same or at least you try it to do it like everyone that cares about music reproduction in an imperfect audio systems environment and analog reproduction medium.

IMHO we have to take care that the cartridge signal " suffer " the less degradation ( looses that you can ever recover. ) at any single link on the audio chain and at the same time that has the less " additions " , we have to try to preserve the signal integrity in the best way we can in our own system environment.
I can tell you that those all efforts about are well worth for say the least.

Other that some designers almost no one take care about RIAA deviation eq. where accuracy is a must to have by any quality performance audio standards reproduction.

Things are that that inverse RIAA eq. accuracy is maybe the great and more challenge in a Phono stage design/execution and very hard to achieve it and that's why almost no one " speaks " about.

Regards and enjoy the music.

Raul.

Dear Piedpiper: That's right.

Anyway we can't do nothing about because we don't have any " control " on the recording process we can do things where we have some " control " on it and that is from the very first moment that we take a LP to play with it not before.

IMHO everything the same the more accurate system have a better quality performance.

I make " focus " on the RIAA accuracy and in the amplifier output impedance that IMHO has to be lower than 0.1 Ohms.: this " figure " give us confidence that almost any speaker electrical impedance curve can be handle with out any trouble on frequency inaccuracies ( mistmatch between speaker an amplifier. ), this means synergy and synergy in the right sense of the word not the " synergy " that many " professional " reviewers speak about like: " to use this amplifier you need a " warm " speaker ..., or " you need a soft high frequency amplifier for this speaker ", these kind of examples speak nothing about real synergy but trying to hide a " trouble/distortions " with another kind of " distortions/colorations ": incredible but this is the way those reviewers give us advise about synergy with out to find where are/is the main trouble for that system behaivor!!!

I don't like to accumulate distortions/colorations over distortions/colorations and the like.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Lewm: +++++ " is usually achieved by using gobs of negative feedback " +++++

IMHO is up to the designer know-how and I don't want to open a new " door " on this thread about, suffice is to say that you can do it not necessary with " gobs of negative feedback ".
Now there is nothing wrong with feedback, in many circuit stages, if you know how to use, how to apply, where to apply and in which quantity.

I don't think about " rules ", what I'm trying to say is that a low output impedance in any amplifier is a desired one for a miimum speaker/amplifier mistmatch and for a better quality performance but like anything we always have to deal with trade-offs.

+++++ " If I could do it, my "rule" would be that all speakers must have a flat impedance " +++++

I could agree with this part of your " rule " ( only this part that it is not what you are saying. ), this characteristic can help to a better sound reproduction quality performance.

Regrds and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Plinko: +++++ " What a surprise! " +++++

You have at least one additional option named MM cartridges type that with the right set up could make wonders for your music sound reproduction and you don't need at all any SUT.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear Plinko: +++++ " then choosing say, a $10K phonostage is choosing the path of the audiophile and not the music lover. " +++++

As Lew point out both terms: audiophile and music lover can/could " live " at the same time ( like in many many of us ) one of them not exclude the other.
Of course that exist the 100% audiophiles ( many of them with very high price audio systems ) that are not a music lovers ( they only enjoy the " sound " but nor the music. ) and the 100% music lover that does not care about " audio hardware ".

José and I take the DIY route because we first are music lovers than audiophiles and we like/want to enjoy the music ( not only sound ) in the top way that we can.

I don't buy any audio item or build it just to have the the best and latest audio item, I only take that kind of decision ( and the money is not the principal issue about ) only if that item ( new or a modification of what I have ) can improve the enjoyment of the music. Take a look to my system: very " old " items that ( with the right mods and DIY like the Phonolinepreamp ) give me an enormous and wonderful enjoy of music and what music can make in my emotions/feelings.

I always try to enjoy the " software " not the " hardware ", the " hardware " is only a " bad necessity " and the best the hardware ( and your know how about ) the best your music enjoying.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Dear friends: I come back on the RIAA eq subject because there is a subject of critical importance where almost no one ( and I say " almost " only because I don't read any single post on Agon but the true is that I never read nothing about. ) speaks on and that it is almost important as is the accuracy on the RIAA: inverse eq.RIAA interchannel deviation.

What this means?, well in a Phonolinepreamp or Phono stage we have the RIAA for the left channel and the one for the right channel. In a perfect world both must be exactly the same ( mimic ), any deviation between them degrade makes a signal degradation in many ways and yes you can hear it.
Take a look to some Phono stage measures through Stereophile on the RIAA subject and in all of those measurements ( SS or tube ) exist deviation between left and right channels RIAA curve of 0.1db ( for say the least ) and higher.

Now, we have to have not only " matched " inverse RIAA eq. curve channels but at the same importance level we must have both channels with the same gain, 0.1db of gain difference between channels well makes a " difference " in the performance and leave us faraway from the recording.

So IMHO are ( at least ) three critical areas to make justice to the recording through a Phonolinepreamp: inverse eq. RIAA accuracy, no interchannel deviation on the inverse eq. RIAA curve and matched gain in both channels.

As any one can see the Phonolinepreamp ( RIAA ) is truly a complex subject and a true challenge for any one that try to be near/truer to the recording.

Why am I posting about?, well because those subjects are IMHO of paramount importance and ( if the design take in count with care. ) make a great difference in the quality sound reproduction/performance .

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.