Anyone have experience with the PH-1000 and tube stage

Wow.  

You are essentially saying “if you strip out the Steelhead’s extra resistors, caps, and its passive/White-follower section, the core phono circuit sounds much cleaner.”

That’s exactly what the Chinook already is — the same basic tube phono gain stages, minus the additional attenuation and cathode-follower output network that the Steelhead uses.

So unless you need the Steelhead’s built-in volume control or buffered line output to drive a long interconnect or very low-impedance amp, the Chinook gives one the purer signal path with fewer sonic compromises.

Therefore I would guess that I am essentially better off sonically with the Chinook and so would be most high-quality systems where:

• There is already a good linestage or preamp,
• You value transparency and immediacy, and
• you don’t need an integrated phono/linestage in one chassis.

I’m not gonna pay $10G plus to degrade my signal chain.  My only gripe with Chinook is the inconvenient access to the controls - DIP switches on the back.  

Re The PH1000 and the PH1006/12 Tube Stage, the pro reviews (Stereophile, Hi-Fi+, Mono & Stereo, etc.) all call it exceptionally quiet, transparent, and remarkably flexible — three inputs, wide gain/load range, and 40-plus EQ curves.  That appeals to me because I run three very different cartridges: SoundSmith Hyperion Mk II ER, Koetsu Rosewood Signature, and Miyajima Zero Mono, each needing its own profile.

What I can’t tell from reviews is how much the Tube Stage or external PSU really change the sound.  On paper, the tube buffer should add some harmonic richness, while the outboard PSU should lower noise and improve micro-detail by isolating the analog section — but are those changes clearly audible?

If you’ve compared the base PH-1000 to the full stack, I’d appreciate your impressions — warmth, resolution, noise floor, overall musicality.  Thanks for any firsthand insights!

BTW, I should have mentioned that I have the Chinook SE which has upgraded innards and tubes and a gain of 65 dB.  It perfectly matches the Hyperion mkII MR loading and covers the other cartridges I have (and most of those I covet).  Lastly I really do like the sound of it in my system.  The ONE thing I don’t like is having to fiddle around in the back to change loading.  However, I don’t want to sacrifice sonics on the alter of expediency.  

No, you’ve misunderstood what I wrote. But never mind. I’d wager the Chinook uses a CF output though maybe not a White CF.

I think I got it.  Not dissing the Steelhead but I don’t need or want another Linestage - already have one of those - or further complications in the signal path.  It seems that the Steelhead adds integration and easier functionality vs Chinook (front panel knobs and maybe a warmer sound - at a price.  But I’ve always thought that the basics of the phonostage in Chinook were very similar to Steelhead.  Even the switches are less complex - at the expense of convenience.  You’ve figured a useful workaround and I admire that.  Kudos.  

Other than a modicum of the 2nd and 4th order harmonics of tube distortion I’m good with a clean flat sound in my phone stage.  The cartridges provide the core analog sound.

Great input lewm!  Thank you!!