SUT help

@lewm  Has this not been where the Thread Started,

Has not all Posts been close to describing what one is doing as their very unique methodology to experience a particular type of Cartridge and nothing else.

Have you not yourself stated the following:

 "The answer to Raul's OP question seems to be no, nobody knows which cartridge type is inherently "better".  But most of us have an opinion."

Funny how when I express an opinion on how I perceive what might be the best conditions to assess the Mother of all Phon's, the reply is that it is utter rubbish.

A Pole might suggest my hypothetical list is one that a proportion of others seem to think would be attractive is able to be achieved.

But!, If they Don't, at least the assessment of the Threads Theme and Contribution has bee maintained, where most of us have an opinion . 

Help me out please, when the Phon' of Phon's does become available for my experiencing. How do I capitalise on this opportunity.

Must the TA be the £60K Sat. 

Must the LOMC be over £20K

Must the TT be north of £80Kish

Must the Interconnects be £20K+

What must the Downstream equate to £250Kish.

@pindac High end audio isn't driven by price, its driven by intention. For that reason, the most expensive gear might not be the best sounding. Its simply the most expensive.

Funny how when I express an opinion on how I perceive what might be the best conditions to assess the Mother of all Phon's, the reply is that it is utter rubbish.

If I had to guess, the reason was because @lewm is possibly aware that price and sound quality have nothing to do with each other or at best are only loosely associated.

@atmasphere You Stated:

"the most expensive gear might not be the best sounding."

Might !!, Is very broad in its context used.

I will say when I eventually / If I eventually get to experience the end sound produced by the most expensive equipment. There might be a sound discovered that shows it to be extremely desirable to keep in use, maybe more attractive a sound than any other encountered. Obviously affordability will be the realised  constraint to making an acquisition materialise.

I don't see too much difference between either of our Statements, they are both Conjecture. 

I suspect that any body with a interest in experiencing something that is off real interest to them, is with a underlying wish to experience the very best of what is available.

Gastronomes will quite happy put their name on a waiting list to be given a seat in a restaurant of choice with a year for the waiting.

A Photography Enthusiast, will usually make sacrifices to get to the place of having professional quality Glass in their arsenal of lenses.

Vintage Car Enthusiasts will Travel far and wide to see the most pristine models from their chosen era of production.

Vehicle Enthusiasts, with little interest in owning a Performance Car will pay to experience Track Days in Super Car with Professional Driver and Coach, just to know what it is all about, a Performance Car Enthusiast, I presume the Goal is to keep going to the day out is in a Formula One Vehicle?

As for Audio Equipment, there are many who are enthusiasts, that would like the experience of being seated in front of an Uber Expensive Set Up.

I myself have done this on occasions to the point I class myself as Familiar with an extremely expensive Audio System. Even though extremely impressive and always thoroughly enjoyed when experienced, I do not class this as the Very Best in Audio, neither is it the very best produced sound that I have encountered.

My own take is attraction to end sound is unique to each individual, so each has their very own preference for what they want to wed themselves to.

My inquiry was relating to what would need to be the supporting equipment to prove a particular device selected for Audio purposes is the Best of the Offerings.

If I made the Statement I have heard the best end sound from any of the Phon's I have heard in use, hence I believe this Phon' to be the best Phon' ever produced.  I'm sure my statement would be questioned quite heavily.

The heavily questioning may be quite less, if such a statement is backed up with the types of supporting equipment used, the description offered will hopefully be one that can be seen to be with increased creditability, if references to equipment used are seen as cutting edge and at the forefront of design and function.

But most importantly, all the context of the above is conjecture, the experiencing and impression being made is the only way to assess how an end sound is one to be lived with or not.

@lewm seemingly decided he knew the quality of the end sound of my owned Phon's and suggested my owned and in use Phon's, were inferior in producing sound to others.

My Bespoke Built Phon' was over a period of time carefully worked with, to Voice it to my own particular preference. When the Phon' got to the end sound I was most attracted to. The designer / builder, made it known, my version was to be the upgrade option. I know I have got exactly what I want to make Old Bones with.

I also know Customers for this same Phon' design are extremely pleased with having discovered this as an option.

   

       

  

Okay so maybe time to get back on the rails here...

What exactly is the point here?

None of this is doing any service to my original question, and seems more to be a debate about who is 'right.' The theoretical gear needed (or not needed) to 'prove' or 'disprove' anything is a pointless discussion. Everyone has different gear, rooms, ears, preferences, and opinions. It's also completely irrelevant to my question.

I fully appreciate that there are varying experiences here with SUTs, with some finding some pleasing improvement to their experience, and others not. All are valid experiences.

From answers to my original questions, it seems like finding a SUT with 1:10 and 1:20 options might be best since it sounds like there's been success with both and either should work with various configurations on my phono pre-amp. Some good suggestions on specific models to consider so far, but if anyone else has any other suggestions that might fit the bill, happy to check them out as well. Thank you to all who have provided some guidance on proper matching.

@mmcgill829 The very best method to make a discovery about a impact a device can have is to experience it with an open mind.

You are on the right track with Winding Ratio's selected.

The want to experience will be furthered as an educational encounter when a SUT is used in your system.

Your assessment of your experience, as well as the impression that is made on you, is awaited by myself.

There is plenty of info in this thread and linked threads to help you get a bearing on what has been experienced. 

I am happy to have supplied a description that will be a aid to this. 

 

Pindac,  I know nothing about your phono stage and certainly never said or even implied that it was inferior. Originally, I was merely asking about how the term "Transconduction" might apply to the mystery phono stage that you like. The way you used the term, it seemed you were suggesting it is a category of phono stage opposite to a "Transimpedance" or current driven phono stage. To me, the alternative to current drive is voltage drive, and there is no need to adopt the term transconductance because in fact all audio gain devices act through transconduction.  Then you revealed finally that your phono stage at least starts life as a Paradise phono, made on a custom basis in the UK, so far as I can tell.  I read something about it and commented that it received a lot of favorable mention on the internet, and that it appears to use an FET and a tube complement that are both reminiscent of the Herron phono stage that is much liked on this side of the pond. Please show me where I criticized the Paradise phono, on any basis at all, let alone its relatively low cost. I also never in any way said that cost is directly proportional to results in audio.  It most certainly is not.

@bobsdevices , I have an Hana ML. which one of your products do you recommend? Even older models would be fine.

I also have the Mod Wright 9.0.

@lewm I do not own a Paradise at the present or any other time.

I have described how I have experienced the Paradise as a SS Circuit as a few build guises. 

I also made it known that an alternative SS Phon' is also known to me that is one I am very impressed by.

I am without a Vinyl Source, it is packed away ready for storage. 

I have a few intersting experiences to be had around Vinyl Replays in the future.

I am having most of the Musical experiences in the homes of others. 

For myself, being social around my hobby  is more important than the  music replays and much much more important than equipment. 

From answers to my original questions, it seems like finding a SUT with 1:10 and 1:20 options might be best since it sounds like there's been success with both and either should work with various configurations on my phono pre-amp.

@mmcgill829 We have used SUTs in our preamps (I prefer direct FWIW) but one thing we noticed was the less gain you try to get from the SUT the better. So if it does have reconfigurable stepup (like the Jensen JT-346, which is an excellent SUT, one of the best), use the least amount that will get you enough gain. Its Ok if you have to run the volume up on your line stage a bit; as long as the noise floor of the phono section overall is less than that of the silent grooves of a good quality LP, you're good to go. IOW 1:10 is better than 1:20.

Re atmasphere:  Key is the noise floor of the phono stage.  I have found that using a SKY SUT to bring the input to the phono stage at about 7mV works best to my ears in most cases.  Of course it depends on the quality of the phono stage.

@bobsdevices Our phono sections are designed to work with LOMC cartridges directly.

It seems where SUTs are best suited is if the phono section is designed for high output MM cartridges. That's always been their traditional use.

@atmasphere I was referring to your comment about using the least gain from the SUT the better.  That has not been my experience.  By the way, I am still using your line stage and love it.

@bobsdevices Thanks!

We occasionally run into customers who can't abide any phono noise despite the phono section being quieter (so inaudible) then the LP surfaces themselves. That kind of individual seems to value the noise floor over other characteristics. For them, SUTs are useful even though the phono section works quite well down to 0.2mV. So I think this is a different application than what you are describing- we found that the least amount of step up resulted in a more spacious soundstage, stuff like that. If the phono section has less gain this result might be quite different!

I have been following this thread with much interest as I too wonder if adding a SUT or other pre-phono stage device might improve the "realness" of the sound coming from my Whest 40RDT fed by a Benz Gullwing on a Basis 2000 table with a Rega RB900 arm or coming from an Electrocampaniet ECP 1 with a Hana ML or AT33Mono on a Technics 1200G (and other carts not yet tried). The discussion here has not yet resolved (for me) into a decision either way. Of course, I realize that trial-and-error governed by one’s own ears in one’s own room is usually the most recommended approach on these inspiring and insightful forums.

Nevertheless, not meaning to rattle a hornet’s nest, I was wondering what the much more expert audiophiles here might think of the Audiophiliac’s recent evaluation of three SUT solutions:

I have not watched the Youytube Clip, the Title itself 'Best Sound' is a detractor immediately. I have run out of Steam, when it comes to being exposed to such individualist assessments. 

A Phon' used as a MC Input only or MM Input connected to a SUT or Head Amp, is a matter of choice to experience and a matter of choice if it is to be maintained.

The choices made are not ubiquitous and the Math for the choices that can be made will take one to one option type if the quietest of output is the desired goal.

I have as of yet, in relation to listening experiences, not been convinced that a MC Input on an Phon' is the option to be maintained by myself, over other options. 

 

I watched the video. The SPU 1 cartridge puts out 0.18mV, by a very liberal criterion of 5mV/cm stylus velocity. The JC3+ affords 64db total gain on MC. Could be that the amplified output of the JC3+ is not quite enough to get the most out of the downstream sound system. (The signal voltage output would be about 0.27V, not by itself enough to get the most out of most amplifiers.) Could be the JC3+ has an inherent lean sound on MC settings. Could be his ears. Anyway, for sure a SUT is an option.

Thanks for weighing in @pindac and @lewm. What intrigued me about the video was the discussion about SUTs providing different flavors which could be interchanged either by swapping the transformers (in the one case) or changing the loading and impedance in the case of the Andros Allasso. I was intrigued by Guttenberg's suggestions for accommodating different carts and, in the case of the Allasso, making on-the-fly adjustments. What are your thoughts on these two different SUT applications?  

@vacountryboy Since he didn't go into detail at all regarding winding ratios, I wonder if the different 'flavors' he could be referring to may simply just be a difference in gain between the different models - though the perceived difference between the two Audio Note models is interesting as they have the same ratios I believe.

Ultimately what I've gathered from this thread is just that there's no definitive answer here and ends up coming down to individual preference based on how things sound in your home and system. I'm going to try to poke some friends of mine to see if they have any models I could demo in my system just to play around with different things before I make any buying decision.

In my first post on this Thread I make known my perceptions of experiencing broad variety of different SUT's from Brands and Tranx Suppliers. I also add my perceptions of Head Amp's experienced as well.

Various Perceptions of Tonal Richness can easily be described variety of flavours or seasoning.

What I did not make known is that I can create a perception of immense Tonal Richness by using the MM Input on my Valve Input / Output Phon'. It is not in anyway preferred, but is as Tonal Rich as I would ever go near as an experience to be had.

I have experienced SUT's that can create a perception of TR that has surpassed the direct into the MM Input I can endure for short periods.

SUT's need to be experienced, to discover where ones TR tolerances are to be pressed on or where there is a TR that can be embraced and wanted to be maintained. 

Different SUTs apparently can sound different from one another, even when they are the same with respect to turns ratio (i.e., the amount of voltage gain added).  This can be due to the nature of the core material (the transformer wire is wound around a core; there are many different choices for core material, and I am not equipped to discuss them), the nature of the wire used (purity of copper or silver or silver plated copper), the input and output jacks per se, and the interconnects that must be added into the signal path in order to install a SUT.  If you think that's a virtue or that you can make it a virtue, go for it. I am sure a transformer manufacturer can list still more factors that affect SQ.

There is a pursuit for Transparency, I am familiar with that very pursuit, and got off the Bus, where I found the levels I like.

My selections of SUT and Head Amp' are tools that enable my selected levels of Tolerable Transparency to not be noticeably encroached upon.                                   For myself both perceptions locked onto, a very loose, slow to decay Bass, as well as the Perception of Crystalline Transparency are Detractors in equal measure.

It is also an interesting point, that the few individuals I know that created what I will refer to as a s Crystalline Transparency, spent quite a period of time attempting to discover a Rich Tone that could be added that was tolerable to themselves, enabling the periods of listening to be accepted for longer periods.

The individual on their pursuit for Transparency/Richness have to find their own unique place to get of the Bus when it comes to end sound being produced,

Too much Transparency can be well Too much Transparency, this is not a Goal in how a Audio End Sound is to be presented, it is a Idealism, a Fantastical Place.

Only a few promote the idea of Transparency, each individual should decide on their own interpretation through listening and deciding what is now  'Too much Transparency'

As Transparency is broadly described as a condition where unwanted residuals are processed and removed, as an attempt to keep the system as pure as possible.      The image might help with a visualisation of what can be classed by some as needing 'Further Transparency' maybe the Grey Connector is too much colour to be able to visualise for a few. Another Group, will view this Clarity as 'Too much Transparency' , maybe a little more opaqueness to the material will be welcomed, or the addition of a translucent veil might suffice, maybe some might not want to visualise it at all, and put something in place to screen it off.