The best phono stage out there?


I have recently purchased a basis turntable and was wondering what analog lovers think is the very best phono stage they have heard . I currently use the Sutherland PhD and like it very much but have not really had an opportunity to audition other great phono stages. The cartridge I intend to use is the Dynavector XV-1S .
Thanking you for your opinions
ecka

Showing 5 responses by atmasphere

The word 'best' exists for a reason. In the audio world though, defining what that even means is troublesome.

So what is the best? Is it something that everyone agrees on? no.

The best specs? Maybe, but likely not. Its now well-proven that what is important to our ears does not show up on paper very well, if at all.

I think it would be a bad idea to focus on any one characteristic and most audiophiles have different ideas about what is important.

So best, unfortunately IMO is only defined personally, and is inherently limited to the experience of the individual. IOW there can be something out there that is a whole lot better, but since its unknown to the individual, it does not exist.

So we ask. The problem here is that we have a vernacular that describes audio artifact or lack thereof, but the vernacular lacks the ability to transmit knowledge of intensity. The result is that one person can be describing a cheap transistor amp that might be the best they have ever heard, and the person he is talking to is used to much better equipment, maybe a $20,000 tube amp, yet they are using exactly the same descriptions to describe very different experiences.

So, IMO, while there is a best, there is no way that we can talk about it intelligently. So it might be wise to ask a different question!
Noise floor is not the final word in phono stages by any means. Some phono stages are quiet, until you put on a record and realize that there are an awful lot of ticks and pops. Other phono stages (usually ones with passive EQ) may have a slightly higher noise spec but will not play the ticks and pops so bad, even though they have the same bandwidth (IOW its not a function of high frequency response).

Since these are subjective issues not easily measured on the bench, there is no specification that will let you know how badly a phono section will exacerbate surface noise- you just have to compare them.

IMO/IME this is an important quality of the 'best' phono stage...
Hi Ecka, active phono EQ works inside a feedback network in the phono stage (the feedback takes a bit of the output signal and feeds it back to the input). Because the signal propagates through the phono section at a very finite speed, the feedback is always running a little behind the actual signal itself- in effect it never arrives back at the input in time. This problem is not so bad in the bass region, but in the highs it contributes to ringing in the phono stage. Pops and ticks are the sort of thing that will thus become more noticeable if your phono section employs loop negative feedback.

Loop feedback is known to reduce distortion overall, but at a price- at actually enhances (although in trace amounts) certain odd-ordered harmonics. The trouble is that our ears use these harmonics as loudness cues, so quite often loop feedback contributes to brightness or hardness in the phono section, while on paper the specs appear to be quite good.

Balanced differential operation offers several advantages- of course the cartridge itself is balanced, so you can accept the signal in the balanced domain and get less noise and artifact from the interconnect. But balanced differential operation is also lower distortion because distortion is canceled at every stage throughout the preamp. It also can be lower noise. I like to use tubes as well since tubes can operate without loop feedback, and what I found is that if you really want tubes to be quiet, balanced differential is an excellent way to go.

Of course I use our preamps (either MP-1 MkIII or MP-3) in my system- I use both the ZYX Universe and the Transfiguration Orpheus, both exceptional low output cartridges.
Jcarr, while I agree with most of what you have said, and I also feel that its a bad idea to make generalizations, especially in **this** sport, I can safely say that I have yet to see a decent circuit where feedback was also a good idea. Certainly I have seen and worked on many circuits that I consider less than ideal; many of them would not work at all without feedback. Nor would they sound right.

My comments are really aimed at the state of the art, which IMO is going to have to do when we talk about the 'best' :) In that context we may have a difference of opinion, but I'm stick'n to my story: feedback violates the most important rule of human hearing, our perception of loudness. Thus a designer uses it at his/her own peril, as it will be an influence that steers the electronics away from sounding real, and towards sounding like a hifi.
Jcarr , we certainly agree about that! There are so many things that have to be taken into account that any designer that focuses too closely on any one aspect may well be doing so at his/her own peril. I think, like you (I imagine), that while its nice to get the specs to look good on paper, that there are so many things that we can't measure and so many things that we do that are not important- you **have** to listen carefully as well.