2. analog
  3. 1240225358

Einstein Turntable's Choice vs EAR 834P + MC4

I have been contemplating a phono stage upgrade from my EAR 834P and MC4 transformer, and have compared it to a couple of highly rated phono stages. My 834P is un-modded, apart from using JJ 12AX7 tubes. The MC4 step up is a major upgrade over the internal transformers, but effectively doubles the price of the 834P. I am using it with a Nottingham Ace Spacedeck, Micro Seiki MA505 arm and Koetsu Rosewood cartridge.

A few weeks ago I borrowed a Tom Evans GrooveX, which had adjustable loading and capacitance. This is a very highly regarded phono stage but I found it severely disappointing. While it was extremely quiet and tonally neutral, it lacked real dynamics. Guitar strings, cymbals, drums all lacked that speed and snap that vinyl does so much better than CD. While initially impressive, I gladly returned the Groove after a few days.

Over the last few days I have been listening to the Einstein Turntable's Choice. This is about 50% more expensive than the 834P/MC4 combination and has been getting rave reviews, regarded as comparable with some of the best phono stages at any price. It comes with a number of different impedance plugs so that it can be matched with any cartridge.

The Einstein TT is much better than the Tom Evans stage. It produces dynamics as well as a rich, liquid sound, and is extremely quiet and resolving. This time the comparison with my 834P/MC4 was not all in the EAR's favour. The EAR phono now sounded a little noisier, with a little more hash and grain, while the Einstein sounded smooth, quiet and liquid. I was almost ready to order the Einstein.

However, again I had some subtle misgivings, which I couldn't quite put my finger on. So I made some 24/96 digital recordings of both and switched back and forth between the files. The Einstein is dynamic, but I felt that the EAR - despite being a tube design - was just a touch faster and more rhythmic. The Einstein is also darker sounding (the 834P has a reputation for sounding dark, but the MC4 brightens it up considerably), and its "liquid" sound was just a little overdone - I normally like a smooth, liquid sound, but here it seemed as if all the intruments were connected in one "flow". The 834P/MC4 gave instruments their own space and a better defined sense of texture, even if the Einstein had better resolution and was quieter.

At the end of the day I preferred the EAR 834P and MC4 step up. The Einstein Turntable's Choice is an excellent phono stage and I could easily live with it. But I felt that the EAR combination was, for me, more musical. Obviously, this is a personal view and other people will have a different take.

I guess it also goes to show that the 834P is a remarkable design at its price. Even in stock form it sounds truly excellent (although it has a few detractors). Add a great transformer, such as the EAR MC4 and it is comparable with phono stages costing a lot more, and may even be preferable, depending on your tastes. Rather than looking for a new phono stage, I am now planning to have my 834P modified by upgrading the capacitors and resistors - hopefully this will increase its resolution and reduce its slight amount of grain, to the point where it is much better than the competition.

Again, this comparison was made using my equipment, my ears and my preferences, and should not be taken as definitive. Nevertheless, I hope it may be a useful data point for anyone contemplating buying any of the phono stages mentioned above.
rossb
tfkaudio
591 posts
 
I once had, in addition to my EAR 834p, a far more expensive phono stage in my system. I don't have it anymore. The EAR was better. Ignore those who say "shame on you" for living with all those "colorations". These are the people who would have told Stevie Ray Vaughn, who was picky about the tubes he used in his guitar amps, that solid-state measures better and produces less coloration. The artists add their colorations, the recording engineers and mastering engineers add theirs, and we add ours. If we don't add our own colorations with our gear (impossible), or add less (subjective), we still end up with something that doesn't sound much like the original performance. In the end, what you like the best IS the best.

Cheers.
rossb OP
183 posts
 
>>Yes, you like all those EAR distortions/colorations and this is what it matters more because you are the one that must live with it but IMHO the Einstein put you near to the recording where the EAR combination put you far away from the recording.<<

I won't respond to Raul's post in detail. Others can form their own view on these differing opinions. However, I will respond to this one comment about the Einstein putting you closer to the recording while the EAR puts you far awar.

I own a few Chesky LPs, and I also own the CD versions of those LPs. Recently, I have also downloaded the 24/96 digital versions of those recordings from HD Tracks. While digital recordings are not always a good guide because their mastering is not always ideal, this is not the case with the Chesky recordings, whose mastering in both digital and LP versions is always excellent.

In terms of things like tonality, spatial information and instrumental texture, the EAR 834P/MC4 sounds a lot closer to the digital versions - especially the 24/96 versions - than the Einstein (while also adding a certain indefinable "analog" realness). The same LP played through the Einstein sounds a little different to the digital versions - darker, with less tonal variation, instruments having less separation, a little more liquid. The differences are subtle, and the Einstein is still undoubtedly very good, but it renders music in an audibly different way to the digital versions. Draw from this whatever conclusion you like.
downunder
1,329 posts
 
I have heard the Einstein in my system and it is a very nice sounding SS unit. I thought it was a little too intense sounding and has no magic - hard to explain easy to know when you hear it. While that was quite exciting it also got a little tiring after a while.

The EAR 834P deluxe is the superior music playing device, however I will admit it is coloured. Please add one or two Mullard 12ax7/cv4004's and this will relax the forwardness and remove most of the grain.
BTW one of my cartridges is the Rosewood and that sounds terrible with the standard 834P deluxe - I assume that the adjustable taps on the MC4 enables you to dial in the right load for the cartridge to see.

I have not heard the MC4(but I want to), however I have heard the 88PB( which would have similar or better transformer than MC4) and that retains the EAR analog musicality while adding better transparency, faster dynamics, more coherent top to bottom but at the same time less grain and more analog relaxing sound.

If I was in your shoes, I would trade the 834 on a 88PB and have a 2 input phono stage. You can then compare the MC stage with the MM + MC4 and see what you prefer. win win.

I totally agree with you that the EAR does make for better and more musical enjoyment compared to the Einstein IMO.
rossb OP
183 posts
 
>>BTW one of my cartridges is the Rosewood and that sounds terrible with the standard 834P deluxe - I assume that the adjustable taps on the MC4 enables you to dial in the right load for the cartridge to see.<<

My experience was also that the Koetsu and 834P alone are not a good match, mostly because the loading of the internal transformer and the Rosewood are not a good match, and the internal transformer is of only average quality. Also, the 834P on its own is a little dark sounding, which is not ideal with the Koetsu which also has this quality. However, the MC4 transforms the sound of the 834P completely, partly because of the more accurate impedance matching but also because, aside from being a much better quality transformer, it also removes a lot of the dark colorations from the 834P.

However, I will have to look into the 88PB - this is not something I had previously considered, so thanks for the suggestion.
opus88
530 posts
 
Downunder and I are on the same frequency regarding the musicality of the EAR 88P, which by the way offers excellent dynamics and imaging as well. He has auditioned the 88PB. I own one, and right out of the box I very much liked its sound. Also, I was able to directly compare a Mitch Singerman modded 88PB with the stock unit. In my opinion, the stock unit sounded more musical even before I started burning it in. Despite the impression the modded unit may have sounded a touch more neutral it was just not as involving to me, having seemingly lost some of the magic the stock unit exhibited. Incidentally, regarding so called neutrality, I must emphasize this characteristic does not necessarily or always make for a more enjoyable listening experience. Prior to acquiring the EAR 88PB I owned and/or auditioned some extremely fine preamps with the phono stage but none, to my ears, singularly gave me the combination of qualities I had been listening for and which I found in the 88PB. If I were you, I would see if I could get my hands on a modded 834P before rushing into taking some of the insides out of your stock unit. A mod does not automatically guarantee an upgrade in satisfaction. Good luck.
More to discover