Phono Preamps with "balls" ?


taking the cue from another thread about speakers with "balls" - what are some phono preamps that you have found to be the most powerful, dynamic and yet still sound clean.  
i turn on my digital sources and they are often much more robust sounding and would like to know if there are phono preamps that can deliver.  thanks in advance  
avanti1960
One that can accommodate all kinds of cartridges on the market without external step up device 
Violectric pp1 comes in mind with Number of setup switches 

Let me just start by saying that most phono preamplifiers out there are just simply terrible. It's the hardest component to get right. What I found to sound good:

Parasound JC3
Micromega MyGroov
Goldmund PH7
Graham Slee Accession
Parasound JC3+
Whest PS.40RDT
Pass Labs XP-17

What I have found is that many people tend to under gain their cartridges, this leads to a lack of dynamics. Not always the case but many times I have been at friends house and after listening to their setups if it sounded a bit lackluster, I asked if they could raise the gain. Many times, not always, the difference was pretty striking on how much the phono stage came alive.
TW ACUSTIC RPS 100 is a wonderful phono preamp with what you are looking for.It utilizes a large separate power supply,4 tubes 2 6dj8 and 2 12ax7s you can change loading,phase and as all phono curves (Decca,EMI,Columbia etc) from the front of the unit it lists at 18k.Im using it i have used other this is by far the best.Enjoy!!
I own a Simaudio LP5.3, a Violectric PP1 (can't believe someone else mentioned it-I thought I was the only one on the planet to own one), and a Manley Steelhead. By and large, I think that you can pretty much tell which phono stages are going to have the qualities that you refer to as "balls" by looking at the power supply. If it is huge, such as found in upper tier BAT or any Lamm or the TW Acoustics referred to above and the Steelhead, chances are pretty good that you will get those qualities. The power supply is the magic ingredient not only with phono stages but preamps in general. Look at any top drawer preamp that has almost universal acclaim and it is virtually certain it will have either a huge separate power supply (e.g. the ARC Ref 10) or a large internal power supply (which is second best). 
Powerful, dynamic, and ballsy sounding? Get a Decca/London pickup---they almost don't even need a phono pre-amp!
A blast from the past — the RTS 405. A broadcast unit from 1990, built to the highest standard. It reminds me of the Krell PAM7 I had 20 years ago, their last full-function pre with a phono stage. All balls — but it never made my heart melt with a Chopin Nocturne, so ultimately not 'my kind of sound'. But killer on rock, house, etc., anything with bass and drive. It needs a step-up for MC. So low-priced (when you can find one) you can try it just for a lark.
Ayre P-5xe has tons of drive and sounds super clean.  Sounds best balanced.  
We can also add Pass Labs XP-15 and XP-25 to the list.
Parasound...their phono-preamps have all the ability to "get loud" no matter what cartridge you're using.  

If you want to go the tube route, Audio Research.  I'm using a vintage PH-3 and it makes my Denon 103r MC cartridge absolutely sing.  I can imagine that a newer model like the PH-7/8 or one of the References would be a significant improvement.

Good luck on your search...

Arvin
0.25mV Denon 103R with 54dB ARC PH-3 will have zero proverbial balls.
Doshi Alaap phono stage. "Balls" to spare. Also "bells" at times. But "bills" will be hard to pay after you buy one.  
... well not to hijack the thread, but now you've got me interested in the Violectrics @czarivey and @fsonicsmith. I checked out their website. The PPA 600 ticks off a lot of boxes for me. Anyone know how it compares to the PP1?  Google seems to know about that one only in German. 
translator in google works ok for german. 
written communication will be understandable.
for better understanding, ask to provide original and translated version of reply via "their" google and so will you in response with "yours". 

If you are looking for something that sounds particularly dynamic, but without a lean sound that emphasizes upper frequency attack on transients, that is a tough order (I.e., not some kind of fake dynamics).  The only phono stage that I really liked that seemed particularly notable for dynamics was the Lyra Connoisseur, but that has not been made in more than ten years, and I doubt that anyone would give one up for under $20k. 

I listen primarily to digital sources, but, I am still quite surprised by the OP finding digital to be much more "robust" and dynamic.  That may be the case with classical music, where the extreme dynamics makes noise an issue so it is harder to set the volume level to get the full impact of peaks without ticks and pops being really intrusive in lower volume passages, but, for most popular music first issued on records, the original records usually sound more dynamic than the digital versions. 

I don't know if the lack of dynamics has to do with the OP's phono stage, or cartridge, or setup (loading and VTA/SRA affect dynamics a lot), or overall system matching and compatibility.  I would not assume that it is the phono stage that is the biggest contributor to the sense of a lack of dynamics.  To me, the choice of cartridge matters a lot more.  Someone above mentioned the Decca cartridges, and that indeed is an example of a very dynamic and exciting cartridge.  There are other examples, particularly low output moving coils, that do dynamics quite well too.

Take a look at Simmaudio Moon Neo 310LPPhono Preamplifier.

I have the LP5.3RS - basically the same as the 310, with a couple of minor tweaks and when treated to good cables it really performs exceptionally well.
I'm not sure the optional external power supply would provide too much in the way of improvements with the cables I use with it, but I have read thet it makes a significant difference over stock cables.

The smaller 110LPPhono Preamplifier also performs nicely, is more affordable and packs a punch 

Here’s a comparison chart of all their models
http://www.simaudio.com/DATA/PRODUIT/40_en_comp~v~phono-preamplifier.pdf

I had an older version of the  Cambridge Audio CP2 to start with.
After sevreal tweaks I decided I needed a better quality Phono stage
 
I tried an LFD, which sounded very good in the showroom, but it was not a good match to my existing cartridge .

I then tried the LP5.3 - it was like listening to a whole new system - lots of punch - more vibrant.
Adding a great power cable improved performance significantly.

Simmaudio are well known for their phono stages - outstanding clarity, veratile, great dynamics, geat image and extremely quiet - even when cranked to full volume - no record playing :-)

All the "balls" I require :-)

Hope that helps - Steve

Avanti 1960,

It would also help to know more about the rest of your system, at least what cartridge you are running and your current phono stage.  Also, because you are drawing a comparison with your digital source, knowing that would be of some help.

I've yet to hear a CD that plays better bass than my phono section...

I like to run balanced, as all phono cartridges are balanced sources, and that can reduce or eliminate the 'sound' that the tone arm cable might otherwise impart.
I've yet to hear a CD that plays better bass than my phono section...

I like to run balanced, as all phono cartridges are balanced sources, and that can reduce or eliminate the 'sound' that the tone arm cable might otherwise impart.
I wish I could. Very few phono stages, even in the upper tier, offer balanced inputs. Manley does not believe that offering balanced inputs is worthwhile and have an explanation in the FAQ section of their website. 
04-04-2018 9:47pm... well not to hijack the thread, but now you've got me interested in the Violectrics @czarivey and @fsonicsmith. I checked out their website. The PPA 600 ticks off a lot of boxes for me. Anyone know how it compares to the PP1?  Google seems to know about that one only in German.
I made a mistake-the Violectric phono stage I have is the V600. It started out with my purchase of the Violectric V200 headphone amp from Robert at AphroditeCU29. Don't ask me where Robert got that business name but he is great to work with. We got to talking about Violectric and Robert suggested I audition the phono stage and DAC as well. I liked the phono stage well enough to keep it. He also sent me Violectric's DAC that was hot at the time (not good with model numbers) and I was not thrilled with it and sent it back. I have no connection obviously, but Robert's website is AphroditeCU29.com BTW, in Robert's defense, he told me that I would not hear the full capability of the DAC unless I auditioned it with the Wireworld Platinum Starlight USB cord. That ran $800. I told Robert not to bother sending me that cord, because if I liked it, I would hate myself for buying it. Then I bought my AMR DP777 and after getting that, I bought a Wireworld Platinum Starlight USB and now I know that Robert was right. Sorry for the thread drift on the thread drift. 

 

In his Stereophile review of the Liberty B2B phono amp, Michael Fremer described it as being unusually dynamic. There is one currently available on AudiogoN.
thanks to all replies. 
my current setup is technics sl1200 GR, ortofon cadenza blue and lehmann black cube seII.  
When I set the BC for 66 db gain the sound does become more robust with the Cadenza's .5mv output, but it does occasionally sound overdriven.  
setting it to 56 db and a big dropoff in dynamics is easy to notice.  

leaning towards a parasound JC3+ but-
what about a bobs devices 1:15 SUT for example?  
I have heard good things about what a properly matched SUT can do for power and dynamics.  

I’m one who prefers a properly matched SUT to drive to a simple but well designed tube phono stage.

My front end: Technics 1200G --> Bob’s SKY 20 SUT --> Don Sachs’ built Tubes4HiFi PH16 phono stage with upgraded parts and nice wood cabinet --> Linear Tube Audio MZ2 preamp.

Honestly, the MZ2 is the magic component here. It allows the phono stage to sing unimpeded with 3D delivery. Cartridge and tube choices determine the final sound "flavor".

Dear @atmasphere : """ I’ve yet to hear a CD that plays better bass than my phono section..."""

A CD with a top DAC ( 32bits/384 khz.) and good overall design outperforms any phono stage it does not matters the phono stage price/pedigree ( including yours. ) in the bass " management " and this is not because your unit or other units are not good designs because I know your design is a good one but it’s because the differences between a digital and LP recording technics.

The recording microphones pick up all the music in stereo including the bass range but for the LP overall limitations the low bass comes not in stereo as when in the recording but in mono way when in digital comes as what were pick up by those recording session microphones, digital has no limitations about.

That is one of multiple reasons why digital outperforms LP/analog in the bass no matter what.

I repeat, it’s not your quality unit design but the " medium " limitations. No contest by analog in this regards against digital.

I’m an analog lover but I’m not " blind " and certainly not " deaf ".


Regards and enjkoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
A CD with a top DAC ( 32bits/384 khz.) and good overall design outperforms any phono stage it does not matters the phono stage price/pedigree ( including yours. ) in the bass " management " and this is not because your unit or other units are not good designs because I know your design is a good one but it’s because the differences between a digital and LP recording technics.
Nah. I've heard the best digital out there. Sorry.

The recording microphones pick up all the music in stereo including the bass range but for the LP overall limitations the low bass comes not in stereo as when in the recording but in mono way when in digital comes as what were pick up by those recording session microphones, digital has no limitations about.
This statement is false. I run an LP mastering operation (Scully lathe, Westerex 3D cutterhead, modified Westerex 1700 electronics). It is true that out of phase bass is problematic for the LP (which only occurs in pop recordings; if recorded with two mics it does not happen). Problematic is one thing- impossible is another!

If you are lazy, you use the bass processing (and then the bass might be mono for a few milliseconds), but so far we've yet to need it. All you have to do is spend some time with the project (making tests of the problem area) to sort out how to master it (vary the groove depth and amplitude to see what works- a 3 db change is a significant change in modulation...) so you don't have to use processing even if the bass is out of phase.

My recommendation is to get an LP mastering lathe and find out for yourself- or listen to someone that has already gone down that path.
Mola Mola Makua preamp with phono module. Extremely versatile loading set ups for up to six MM or MC cartridges. Very high spec. Take a look on the Mola Mola website for more details.
Dear @atmasphere : As I said the problem is not in the phono stage ( I mean the main problem. ) but  the huge differences that exist in both proccess: recording and play where digital is way way different to how things goes with analog where almost all " thousands " of steps/stages where the signal pass through degrades the signal and you can't argue nothing about because are facts, no matter what. Example other that how the bass is recorded in digital:

analog pass through not one but two terrible huge equalization proccess because the LP medium limitations, these equalizations are the RIAA standard.
Only these proccess ( where does not exist in digital because it does not need it. ) impedes to mantain  what the microphones pick up during the recording sessions but is worst that what we can imagine because the second RIAA eq. ( inverse. ) procces that happens in the phono stage is to even the  original recorded frequency range and this " even " never  never happens ( especially in the bass range. ). First because the RIAA eq. in the phono stage just does not " knows " exactly each single deviation in the eq. curve made it in the whole recording proccess ( so it can't exist that " even " ever. ) and second because all the inverse RIAA eq. curve comes with different frequency deviations all over the frequency range and those deviations over the curve normally stays over 0.2 dbs that at not only affects at each single discrete frequency where is happening but affects too at least two octaves because each single discrete frequency depends  and affects the next one.

Not enough?, ok: at the very first time that the cartridge stylus hits the very first LP groove it can't reads what in reality is that groove or in all LP grooves because the tracking error in the choosed alignment and additional to that tracking error this error develops tracking error distortions that additional these distortions are incremented by other distortions that depends on each cartridge tracking abilities.
All these happens inside a " perfect " tonearm/cartridge alignment set up but " perfect " does not exist so the distortions goes even higher and normally affects more to both frequency extremes.  LT tonearms? has other problems too, forgeret.

Your : "  Nah. ", means nothing other than nah.

If you want more just ask for it because  there are more FACTS about.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.


The Parasound JC3+ has absolutely killed my upgrade fever. The sound is impeccable. Balls for real. I use LO MC cartridges (the Dynavector XXII MK2 gets the most play) on a Pro-Ject X-Tension 10 piped through a PS Audio BHK stack - vinyl sounds high Rez. It’s amazing. Since I couldn’t best the Parasound, I added an EAR MC4 step up transformer and used the MM setting on the Parasound. The micro dynamics and detail coming out of vinyl, while retaining every bit of high and low extension and warmth, were astounding to me, but it was just too much gain, even using the highest impedance circuit on the transformer. Finally took the EAR out. Oh yeah, the JC3+ has balls baby!
As I said the problem is not in the phono stage ( I mean the main problem. ) but the huge differences that exist in both proccess: recording and play where digital is way way different to how things goes with analog where almost all " thousands " of steps/stages where the signal pass through degrades the signal and you can't argue nothing about because are facts, no matter what. Example other that how the bass is recorded in digital:
@rauliruegas This is one of those areas that because you are not in the recording industry, there are things that you don't know, and you don't know that you don't know them.

Here is an example: When a project is mastered for CD or other digital release, quite often it is compressed. This is because CDs are played in cars. When the same project is mastered to LP, the compression is less or non-existent. This is because there is no expectation that the LP will be played in a car. You can talk all you want about dynamic range, but the fact is the industry doesn't care and they want it to work in a car.

Several other points- the LP has since the late 1950s bandwidth well past 30KHz. Playback apparatus has had that ability since the late 1960s. Our (older) mastering electronics are bandwidth limited to 42KHz but could go much higher without the filter at the output of the mastering amps. Digital has never had this sort of bandwidth.

Actually the EQ used by the LP system works pretty well. If we record a 20-20KHz sweep tone, we can play it back with no variation (within 1/2db) on our playback system that we use for testing of cuts, which consists of an old Technics SL-1200 with a Grado Gold, running into a Harmon Kardon HK430 receiver made in the 1970s. Your remonstrations notwithstanding, LP EQ is far more accurate than you make out; the real devil in the details is actually the master recording itself and how much EQ was applied to that before we ever see it.

So 'Nah' is simply 'what is'; right now the digital isn't out there to do the job. I have hopes that it will be and by all indications it is still improving. But you have to wonder why in the heck vinyl is so much easier to find these days (1992 was the year of least vinyl production, over a quarter of a century ago); if it isn't obvious, it is that as a prior art, the succeeding art failed to be better and the market knows it. That simple fact is really all anyone needs to know about this.
@atmasphere : I have not the time rigth now. Wrong, you still live in the past.

Latter on,
R.
Getting back on topic to OP, get a Bottlehead Eros phono. For MC add a proper step up. Very accurate sound. Pure bliss WITH BALLS! I love mine! 
Thank @atmasphere for a very informed and informative set of posts (and on-topic too).
@ronh10    
Thanks for the suggestion but I literally do not have time to build the kit, although the idea of an MM only tube stage feeding a SUT is appealing.  
Any experience with the Decware ZEN ZP3 or the Icon Audio PS2?  
If you're considering an SUT in conjunction with a MM phono stage, then you might also consider the Zyx Cryo Pre-preamp. It is definitely ballsy. The latest update (v.2) increased the gain over the previous version.  It's a marvelous step up device in my opinion and doesn't have some of the drawbacks of transformers (less fussy about cables for instance). Not cheap again, but compared to a good SUT I think it's actually fairly reasonable.  
Any Naim phono stage would get you solid sound with great PRAT and rhythm. Naim is one of the very few brands who get the PRAT right without thinning out the body of the music. A Stageline with Hicap DR would be superb.
Isn't the NVO SPA supposed to be exactly this and a giant killer at the price it's at? 
Dear @atmasphere : I know that you belongs to the AHEE " dark side " and nothing wrong with that.

you said: "" I’ve yet to hear a CD that plays better bass than my phono section..."""

you can’t choose a more worst frequency range to compare digital against LP.

" mastered for CD or other digital release, quite often it is compressed. "

so compressed in the bass range: don’t tell me and please forgeret about because been a part of that " dark side " you choosed on purpose not to say a word on how to EVEN the frequency range after those heavy/terrible RIAA equalizations proccess in analog that positively " destroy " the signal. Additional to impede/prevents the heads burning exist a filter to stop the frequency in that RIAA at over 50khz.

You choosed not to add a single word in your post about that pivot tonearm error alignment, tracking error, skating, cartridge tracking abilities, or ... or... that destroy the signal in the play proccess.

But obviously you are not able to detect or be aware of bass range differences ( huge ones. ) between digital/CD and analog because you are a tube manufacturer and tubes not only can’t honor bass frequency range but any signal that pass through.

Additional you choosed in your hybrid phonopream the wrong SS input device ( FET/MOSFET ) for a LOMC cartridge that it’s looking for bipolar devices that are the only ones that can matchs the MC needs.

So whar are you talking about of something you can’t even listen through your audio system Atmasphere electronics? ! ! ? ?  

In the other side the recordings process the analog signal is recorded in a R2R machine that makes a degradation too due that: develops odd harmonics, high signal to noise ratio, w&f, frequency range limitations, THD/IMD, etc. etc.

All those has no effects against the digital signal because what goes in the R2R tape is not " signal music " but zeros and ones ! ! ! GOT IT.?

I own and just listen to some CD/LP of the same recordings and listen through a humble Denon CD player ( 24/192 ) and the very best phonolinepreamp and tonearm ever ( where you can’t even dream with. ):

Gladiator ( 2000 year. ): LP by ORG 45rpm sampler. LP sounds good but not good enough as that older CD. Through the LP you can’t listen and feel the Zimmer synthetizer power where everything in that bass range is under control: no overhang, really tigth, dry, fast transient, definition note by note and the develops of those bass harmonics ( just unique, as if you where in the " battle ". Remember the picture? because that’s what I’m talking about. ) and with a huge huge soundstage that only can be listening when the bass range is so precise and accurate that in digital. Analog can’t even imagine this kind of bass quality level can exist.

Unfortunatelly you can’t enjoy that quality level, sorry you can't enjoy that " compressed " bass CD range, that we can find out too in:

Glory ( 1989. ), The Thin Red Line ( 1999 ), Vangelis Blade Runner ( 1994 ), 300 ( 2007. ). Yes all from those great pictures film soundtracks.

There are other examples that are extraordynaries on CD: Vikings, Game of Thrones, Strike Back, Marselle etc. etc.

Btw, you need to have inegrated in your home audio system additional to bipolar electronics two self powered subwoofers connected in true stereo fashion ( not one subwoofer but at least two units. ) croosing at around 80 hz and where the main speakers crossing frequency does not pass through any external electronic crossover.

@jollytinker , maybe you need to take your time to understand and you can do honor your moniker.

@avanti1960 , overall what do you mean with " balls "? because that maybe does not belongs to the phonopreamp as you ask for.


Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.




Wow. Just wow. All Atma-Sphere amps have full power bandwidth to either 1 or 2 Hz, and my speakers go to 20Hz as well.

IOW, not knowing what I have in my living room, clearly you have no idea of what it is you are speaking. Your post contains a number of falsehoods and/or outright errors.

I can list them but is it pointless and does anyone care??
Dear @atmasphere : Tubes can’t honor MUSIC with the accuracy need it for. I know that you are very good designer of tube electronics and this is not under question because it’s not the subject. Tubes can’t do it.

Your speakers goes to 20hz? wel mines goes to 16hz by design and even that the subwoofers is a must to have. Period.

Of course that I know " what you have " in your listening room and in your last post confirmed it.

Please before you come back here to post about my " falsehoods/outrigth errors " do it your self a favor and try to find out a true audiophile with a home audio system using bipolars electronics ( with no single tube down there. ) and integrated pair of subwoofers and listen to at least two of those CD/LP recordings I posted.

Again, with out those subs you can’t know nothing at all. No single passive speakers can do it the rigth way.

Please read this:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/do-you-think-you-need-a-subwoofer/post?postid=310058#310058


Regrads and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
@atmasphere : do you still think that R2R is the best analog reproduction medium? because it's not due to all those problems I posted and you as any one can check directly D2D recordings made it  by Shefield Labs whom in the same recording sessions they made the great D2D LPs and recorded on R2R too.

Well the D2D sample outperforms easily the one original master cut LPs.

The latest digital technology/mediums outperforms any single R2R recordings no matters what and outperforms all over the frequency range not only in the bass range.

@atmasphere: do you know or are aware that we all are living in April 2018?

Today it's analog no contest and never will be again ! ! !   Got it?

R.
Sheesh.

do you still think that R2R is the best analog reproduction medium?
No, I've never said that. LP is superior since it is lower distortion, lower noise and wider bandwidth. This is why LPs are used to release albums recorded on tape and not the other way 'round.

Raul, you are embarrassing yourself. The problem seems to be that you know nothing about how the industry makes recordings, and even less about the technologies involved. You should try running a recording/mastering operation sometime. When I first started cutting LPs, a good number of things I thought I 'knew' about the medium were dashed. One was how quiet lathe cuts are- they easily rival digital. The surface noise comes in during the pressing process (Acoustic Sounds with their pressing plant QRP has done a lot to solve that problem and now make the quietest pressings in the world). Another is how much dynamic range the medium has, and how low its distortion actually is (the cutter amps usually have about 10 times the power needed to completely toast the cutter head; the LP mastering system has the highest overhead of any audio process; it can't be overloaded like other processes can be). Additional noise and distortion can be caused by the pickup and equalizer (the latter can add ticks and pops that you might think are on the LP surface). But those problems are correctable. I suspect that you are making a common mistake of construing them with the media itself.

Here is my major objection to digital audio: I've gone to many concerts and also played in orchestra and bands. In those situations, if there is background noise like air conditioning, glasses clinking or people coughing, you can listen past them because they are not the music. Similarly, the artifacts of analog (hiss, ticks and pops) can be easily ignored by the brain as well, because those things sit in the speaker while the music is in 3 dimensions.

Digital OTOH imposes audible distortion (caused by aliasing and other problems, interpreted as brightness by the brain, which is why CDs still sound bright even if you have tone controls and turn the treble down all the way) that cannot be distinguished from the music.

Again, if digital is so much better, why are Best Buy and Target continuing to sell LPs while they are dumping CDs? Why are LP sales eclipsing digital downloads? One reason is digital streaming, but the other is that people that don't know anything about the technical bits still want LPs because they 'sound better'. Until you can solve that dilemma, the analog/digital floggings will continue.

@jollytinker 

If you're considering an SUT in conjunction with a MM phono stage, then you might also consider the Zyx Cryo Pre-preamp. It is definitely ballsy. The latest update (v.2) increased the gain over the previous version.  It's a marvelous step up device in my opinion and doesn't have some of the drawbacks of transformers (less fussy about cables for instance). Not cheap again, but compared to a good SUT I think it's actually fairly reasonable.  

Even the first version, which i am using now, the ZYX CPP-1 Cryo (input impedance 125 Ohm, Step up ration 26db) is very interesting device to have. Arthur Salvatore swear it's better that any top quality SUTs out there. 
If you want oomph and dynamics:

Whest 0.2 (and all the others)
Tom Evans Groove et al
Renaissance (forgotten which model)
Dear @atmasphere : Forgeret all what you write in your last post, it does not helps in anyway to prove that analog bass is better than digital because it's not.

Again do it a favor and listen the CD and the LP of those scores I posted to you and please listen it not in your system that can't honor those scores ( no matters what. ) but in a good home audio system with bipolar electronics and subs. Till you do that is useless all your in good intention words. Don't waste your time till you listen it.

"""  imposes audible distortion (caused by aliasing ... """

don't try to figth against digital and don't try to win  that figth because before you started that figth you already losted it:

http://www.mstarlabs.com/dsp/digital-anti-alias-filters.html 


https://dsp.stackexchange.com/questions/9205/can-we-have-a-digital-anti-aliasing-filter

How many google pages do you need to understand that aliasing is not any more a digital problem as you said?

Btw, do you know that in a home audio system the MUSIC belongs to the bass range?

Dear audiophiles as better your home audio system bass management as better the overall quality performance of your audio system.
According with a scientific studies made it by Harman group the ideal number of subs in a home system is of 4 self powered ones where in " automatic " way the bass range will be smooth and with out bass room nodes and the like. We have to worry on nothing in that bass range and ovbiously that the benefits comes not only on that bass range but at the same time a better mid and high frequency ranges ! !

We need as minimum 2 subs.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

@chakster  yes I've been really impressed with the Zyx CPP-1. It's my understanding that the increase in gain in the second version was actually driven mainly by customers. So the first version may be closer to Mr nakatsuka's original vision.  Also I seem to recall that the input impedance on mine is 100ohm (not 125) so perhaps he lowered it when he increased the gain? 
My Benz-Micro PP1 is not ballsy, FWIW. Refined, yes, and quiet, and fairly revealing, and smooth.

Not sure I would want a phono stage to be "ballsy". I think I would want that further up the chain.
Avanti1960:  I have an Aesthetix Calypso I love.  I did have it upgraded  to a Signature, but looking back, I think I would have just done the tube upgrade.  It sounds much better, having been upgraded-just sayin. This preamp is very versatile.  I run all balanced cables which I think helps in just about any application.  Pull up the reviews. 
I’ve not heard personally but have been told the Odyssey Suspiro has a very powerful and forward sound to it. I’d call Klaus and talk to
him about it. It will be my next phonostage that’s for sure. 

Orysseyaudio.com

Dear friends: I already ask to @avanti1960 explain the meaning of " phono preamp with balls " because that does not exist there ( he did not gives an answer yet. ) but I can read that all of you think it exist in the phono preamp ! ! !

Please some one of you or all can share why is that?

R.