When is it time to consider adding a SUT?


I have an ARC reference phono 2 and am about to take possession of a Benz LPS with a low output. I have heard that installing a SUT such as one from Bobs devices can help the phono pre and provide better end to end performance. Would this help a quality phono pre like the ref 2?
thanks 

gtaphile

Showing 7 responses by billstevenson

I agree with taxmandme, my phone stage is a Conrad Johnson TEA2MAX, which has 55 db of gain.  This is a very high quality tube phono stage.  Although it can handle a range of cartridges from 0.3 mV to 5.0 mV, for any of my low output MC cartridges it is much better to use my recently acquired Bob's Devices Sky 10, set for 5:1 step up.  Much better.  There is a sense of ease about it, greater dynamic range especially noticeable during the quieter passages of performance.  As others have pointed out adding an SUT requires compromise.  In addition to the SUT, a very good set of interconnects is essential, so this is not a trivial tweek.
There is only one problem with your analysis: "the bipolar full SS phono stage" that sounds better than even a mid-level tube phono stage is unobtainium.  Nice try though.
rauliruegas,

Please provide facts to back up your claims.  What phono stage are you referring to?  What tube phono stages have you compared it with?  What is your criteria for deciding what phono stage "outperforms" others?  Try and stick to facts.  Making a statement that you have used something for "thousands" of years, does not help your credibility. 

I will state for the record that I have personally listened to high end phono stages from Conrad Johnson, Audio Research and Manley that sound better to me, in my system, than a solid state phono stage that I have compared them with.  My solid state reference has been a Lehmann Silver Cube.
Raul,

Answering my questions with your own questions is a polemic exercise.  If we are to have a meaningful conversation this is not the way to start.  I provided a frame of reference that offers a clear starting point.  Please answer my questions.
Raul,

Since English seems to be a secondary language to you, perhaps you do not understand my point.  If that is so, please look up the word "polemic" and you will at least understand my objection to your approach.  If you already do understand my point, then you will need to seek out a different person to parry with.

Bill
I passed the ball to you with my very open ended and reasonable questions.   There are no trick questions or traps in them.  You are free to answer them or not, and you are free to state any assumptions you wish in your reply.  I do not intend to engage further without the courtesy of your open answers. 
Thank you for your answer although I must confess that it is not entirely clear to me what you are saying in all particulars. So I will not respond to the parts where I do not fully comprehend your answer. We can agree that everyone of us has unique experiences and that it is difficult to share points of view based on different experiences, references, environments and so on. Nevertheless it can be worthwhile to discuss matters of mutual interest even if our diverse backgrounds prevent full accord. So, I don't agree that it is useless to try.

Although I am an engineer, I am not an electrical engineer and am not qualified to discuss circuit designs or the relative merits of same. I think we can agree that faithfulness to a spcification such as, but not limited to, the RIAA equalization curve would be sine qua non to achieving reasonable sound reproduction. You argue to strive for reproduced sound that is comparable to live music. Although we can agree that this is a noble goal, I suspect we differ on weather it is possible to do so in any practical sense. This is an interesting subject, but far removed from the subject of phono preamps. Nevertheless, since you raise the point, let me comment briefly.

The difficulty is the acoustic environment that a reproduction system is called upon to operate in. It is not and cannot be identical with the one where the recording was made, unless both the live and the recorded result are both listened to in the same space. Although that can be done and has been done, it is not what most of us do in our recorded music lives. As such, it is better to acquiesce to the reality that for most music reproduction the playback environment will be different from the original performance environment. That fact makes using the standard of live performance less practical than perhaps we would wish it to be in an ideal sense. In it's place we substitute various components and compare one vs. the other. Not ideal, but that is what we do, or at least that is what I do. With that said, in my listening room I have a piano and a set of drums and a lot of hand percussion instruments. So I do try to seek the holy grail, but alas my piano sounds different from an identical one played elsewhere, and even something as simple as a triangle or a ride cymbal sounds quite different in my home as compared to that same triangle or cymbal played out in performance. Too, a piano sounds different if heard at the instrument playing it on stage vs. hearing it played by someone else while standing anywhere out in the audience section. Cymbals, triangles, snare drums and on and on all sound different at various locations because of the reflections, reverberations, and so on imposed by the environment.

So, back to phono stages. I listen to music that I am familiar with; first with one phono stage, and then with the other. Most of the time, using good recordings, it is possible to hear a difference. Usually I prefer one over the other. And usually I prefer the sound of tubes although noise can intrude. This is never more true than with LOMC cartridges, even very expensive ones. And when this noise intrudes I have found that a good step-up transformer is the best solution. Now, I think the conversation is back where we began. I like green, you like yellow. Is the conversation useless?