I am very happy with my EAR 834p and Cinemag 1254 based SUT. With the Dynavector 20x2L it works mahhvelessly.
Are You Happy With Your Phono Preamp?
I have been gradually upgrading my analogue components. Which presently consist of: SME 20/2 turntable (old but good), Kuzma 4Point Tonearm, Soundsmith Hyperion (MI) cartridge (love this), Dynavector (MC) DRT XV1, PS Audio Stellar Phono Preamp (connected to ARC Ref 6, Pass Labs 160.8, Avantgarde Uno). I have to say that I am very happy with the analogue sound from this system. That said, high end audio being what it is I can’t help wondering if I am leaving some better sound on the table with the PS Audio phono preamp … though I know I should not judge by price alone. I have been looking alternative phono stages: the VTL 6.5i, ARC Reference 3SE, Boulder 508, Pass XP17 … this price range. Those who are long experienced analogue lovers … do you think I am leaving any sound quality on the table by sticking with the PS Audio phono stage? Do you believe that I would see a meaningful change in sound quality by moving to a phono stage in the price range I have been looking at?
65 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
+1 @z32kerber |
Dear @chilli42 : as @wolfie62 posted:
" Nothing wrong with the PS Audio Stellar phono pre. " I think that after so many posts only the one for him really makes sense.
Almost all the other gentlemans rthat gave you their advises are in realuity tube lovers and even that they think they are in reality rthey are not true MUSIC lovers but hardware lovers and along that I think that almost all of them not even listen once in their life your really good PS phono stage that's way superior to any of those tube units they " die for ". No matters what you need to stay away of tubes if you want to be nearer and truer to the recording, your Stellar is a very good system step/link about. You can try to follow in that direction, you can't go wrong. Audio/MUSIC knowledge levels is way more important that those tube electronics that always but today are all way wrong. I'm not against any of those tube gentlemans owners and I respect all of them, mine is only an opinion just like their opinions.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
A lot of buzz about those fuses. 😎 The old ARC PH2 i was using for a couple of decades was pretty good. |
After 8 years with an Allnic H-3000 mk2, I still have no real urge to upgrade. Prior to the Allnic, in reverse chronological order, were a Steelhead RC, K&K Maxxed Out, and a Trichord Delphini. Each was successively better but the Allnic is a solid cut above. It can be found on the used market at around $5-6K these days, which is a good deal for 2xMC, 2xMM of this quality My Vac Phi Beta pre-amp, 11 years old and going strong, has a MC/MC phono section that is excellent, perhaps second only to the Allnic in my systems. I also have a Modwright Ph9.0, which waits in reserve and gets too little play. It’s quite good, as others have said, and a relative bargain at its price.
Despite my satisfaction with the Allnic and VAC, I am awfully tempted to borrow an Accuphase C-47 from my dealer, just to see how a highly-evolved SS phono stage stacks up. If I end up unable to live without it, I’d get an XLR version of a phono cable I have now, to see what the balanced fuss is about. |
I have always wanted to hear music first produced from a cartridge (balanced output) to a phono amp that is fully balanced, to a balanced headphone amp, and finally into headphones wired for a balanced signal.
I am happy and frustrated with my phono set up as is. It is mostly about the phono preamps that I have tried. I did build a John Broskie Aikido phono preamp and also an Aikido headphone amp that go extremely well together. Using ZMF headphones tops it all off, and I would change that. Ok, so if I go the more common direction with this phono amp and connect it through my system, the sound is way off. So I leave it for the headphone system only. Different problem next, I also built a Pete Millett phono preamp (LCR design) and while I am impressed with its sound through my system, there is a bit of hum that I have yet to find. It is only in one channel. Both of these phono preamps have their merits, but I do prefer the Aikido. |
I have been Wed to a selection of Pre Amp's' over the years and have had Honeymoon and Estranged Periods with the same devices, fortunately in the order of Bliss followed by Tribulation. A few years back, I was caught on a DIY Build Thread for a Pass Design Pre Amp', which I was quite encouraging about and as a result was over time introduced to five build guises of it. I have been impressed beyond the usual and one owner chose the Pre over a selection of Branded Pre's that were demonstrated with an intention to purchase. One the built models has been used in my system for over 18 Months and has made a extremely good impression to the point I have had two PCB 's produced to enable myself to have a 'commission built' Balanced Version of the design. The difficult to comprehend part, is that without a Case, these can be produced for very fair money, even if a Commission Build is carried out. How far a individual is wanting to go with the aesthetic, will add to the end cost. I have seen one produced with repurposed Black Gate's with a Three Box Design inclusive of Circuitry and Source Selector Module, Standalone VC and Standalone Power Supply for less than £500. It was this model that shone above Branded Pre's during a comparison demonstration. A Basic Build that was also present, at the demonstration, proved that it was very close in comparison to a few quite expensive Pre's. The Basic Pre Amp' was the one that the individual behind organising the demonstrations opted for, which has over a period of time had an extra couple of hundred extra spent on it, and with the improved parts on board, does punch well above its cost for the sum of parts. Disclaimer: 1, As for a Transparent Presentation, this Pre' falls into the category of being epitome to this sonic trait. 2, If not a ee savvy individual, the Build is best to be produced/ sourced from a skilled in ee technician.
|
I’ve seen the schematic (of the Ref Phono 2SE), so I know it’s balanced. You’re obviously just going to cling to your notions, such as that differential circuits are "artificially balanced," and you’re free to believe as you wish. |
Perhaps a bit like the 'anticipator circuits' that Krell built from the late 1990s after they stopped selling pure Class A and claimed their Class AB amps were just like Class A. I didn't believe that either. Yes I am very well aware of what ARC say. I was involved a couple of years back with a debate here about this statement by ARC when I was auditioning phono amps for my upgrade. Some posters said it is not fully balanced. Others accepted ARC's statement. I concluded that it could not be certain the ARC Ref 3 is fully balanced. I think both companies might be trying to blind us with their science. |
Even if the tonearm input is single-ended, if the ARC has a differential input stage, then it can be balanced from the point of input through to its XLR outputs. But it would NOT be a balanced run from the cartridge to the ARC’s RCA inputs - so not able to be "fully balanced" from stylus tip to transducer / speaker. Yeah, really I wonder why they didn’t just include an extra set of XLR inputs. It seems like the table to phono stage interconnect would benefit the MOST from a balanced run!! As an owner of the 3SE it actually does irk me that it lacks XLR ins, but my tonearm cables are already wired RCA and OMG the damn phono stage sounds so good as is! That said, I have had some noise issues with it from a plasma TV in another room that might well be eliminated with a balanced run from the turntable? These noise issues only appear in High gain mode. When I use Low gain mode with a SUT, they disappear. |
You'd need to see the schematic of one of these ARC pieces. It is possible to use RCA inputs into a balanced phono, and ARC may have done that on the premise that more than 90% of us end users will have RCAs at the ends of our phono cables. In that case one phase can be on the center pin of the RCA and the other phase can be on the barrel that normally serves as signal ground. If the cable uses two discrete but equal conductors for the center pins and the outer barrel, respectively, this would work OK. It is a bit odd that at the high price point they did not provide BOTH RCA and XLR inputs, if the internal circuit is balanced. |
@chilli42 spend now on software if you feel satisfied, looking for certainties of your doubts among the members of a forum is never a wise idea. |
Thank you for these elaborations. I understand what you are saying, but that is exactly how tonearms were wired to amp inputs before there were balanced domestic set-ups e.g. my first stereo system in the mid 1960s (balanced started in studios where they had long inter-connect runs). So what has changed to make that connection pattern balanced now? Note in this set-up the earth is common to both channels, no separate earth for each. So with that historic pre-balanced pattern I am inclined to think the ARC Ref 3 is not fully balanced.. I was involved a while back here in a thread where a piece was specced as 'fully balanced' but posts were saying it was not 'fully balanced'. Some while back I had some leads made up with XLRs on one end to suit my tonearm output and phonos on the other to input to a phono only phono amp. Since then I have decided not to go that way. I don't pretend to know the answer, but in an environment where some say so -called fully balanced amps are not, I prefer to see XLRs on both sides. By eliminating the XLRs they once put on their top phono amps ARC may have lost a sale here as I decided not to dem it. I used the top Stax headphones and dedicated amp when I lived in an apartment from the mid 1990s. They were awesome. Even if single ended - I have no idea with that five-way single connector. I ought to get them out again and have a listen. |
@clearthinker The tonearm cable from turntable has a separate grounding wire. Instead of duplicating the ground wire per L+R channels (dual 3-pin XLRs), here it’s common for both channels. That’s what the grounding lug next to the input RCAs is for. So IF they wired the tonearm RCAs with "+" and "-" balanced signals on pin and barrel, with ground on the separate grounding wire, and with the ARC taking it in this way (isolating the barrel signal carrying "-" from the chassis), it could be fully balanced over RCAs. There are enough separate conductors. BUT I have no idea if this is how it’s actually setup; it depends on your tonearm cable’s wiring, and I’m not sure this is even a good idea - exposing the "-" signal on an exposed RCA barrel kind of defeats the purpose of common mode noise rejection. Even if it’s NOT a balanced signal coming in, there can still be benefit from using a differential input stage and running everything downstream fully balanced, IMO (like Stax headphone amps). |
Thank you. But I still cannot see how it can be fully balanced if it has only phonos for inputs. If phonos can be balanced, why does it need XLRs for outputs? And why do ARC included XLRs in and out on the Ref pre-amps? And on earlier phono amps like the PH2 that I used with pleasure for 20 years. All fully balanced phono amps offer XLRs for both inputs and outputs. And, as you say, the ARC Ref preamps (I use a Ref 6 and have favoured ARC preamps in the past) include XLRs for input and output that I use as I want to run fully balanced throughout. |
You are completely mistaken. The ARC Ref preamps are fully balanced/floating and the ground floats separately from the signal itself, even on the Ref Phono units that use RCA inputs. (The line stages offer RCA and XLR connections on each input.)
It isn’t clear what you mean by "artificially balanced." How would you design a balanced preamp without differential circuits? Transformer coupling? That’s what many would consider to be "artificially balanced," @clearthinker. |
I’m completely satisfied with my Modwright 9.0X. With the right NOS tubes, it’s sound is in the stratosphere. Favorite tubes used in order of preference 1. Valvo or Philips miniwatt 6922 (PCC88 versions also excellent) 2. Matsushita/Mitsubishi 7dj8 3. Amperex JAN USA 7308 4. Siemens 7308 5. Bel/India 6922 ( Philips) 6. Amperex PQ 7308 Holland ( great tone but smallish soundstage compared to the others) |
My latest moves have been going from a parasound JC3 to ARC PH8 (cannot understate the level of improvement). I was blown away. Shortly after I traded the PH8 in on an ARC Ref Phono 3. Again, I was absolutely stunned. I didn't realize what I had been missing. It seemed like the level of improvement was on the same magnitude as the JC3 to PH8 move (huge). The rest of my system is ARC and I agree that there is great synergy there.
|
I recently bought a used Pass Labs XP 17 phonostage and I am absolutely delighted with it. To begin with in my system it is stone silent even with my 106 dB sensitivity speakers. Also its dynamics are exemplary, markedly improved over my previous Parasound JC3 Jr. which it replaced. The XP 17 also seems to me to combine the best SQ characteristics of tube phonostages, which I have owned, and solid state. I brings new realism to the sound of my LPs. I highly recommend it. |
| Post removed |