Can I use a step up transformer?
Dear @thuchan : For the second time in the thread you posted: """matching MCs with the appropriate SUT is not an easy job. """ first time you said: """ use perfect matching cart/step up combinations thus precisely align the two facing coils you may enter into a different musical experience . """ and I posted: "" what to do to " enter in that different musical experience? "" I think not only me but some other gentlemans are still waiting your " light "/explanation. Could you do it?, it's a critical analog audio subject. Again, thank's in advance. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @thuchan : Over the years I made it and still do several tests with vintage and today SUTs and with different phono stages and cartridges in my audio system and other well know friend's systems. I'm not an expert on SUTs I'm still learning about and what I find out is that the most important subject is to match the SUT , NO that's not the whole word but I have no other, to the phono stage and not mainly to the cartridge as almost all we can think.What we are looking here is for enough additional gain to play LOMC cartridges with no " noise " levels. LOMC cartridges are non-sensible to impedance and capacitance and its has very low inductance. We use a SUT because we need gain that our phono stage can't do it by it self. Changes in impedance affects that gain/SPL and when we make changes on impedance and we hear changes in the frequency response range those changes comes not from the cartridge directly but comes from the interaction between the phono stage/SUT impedance/inductance. Sometimes those changes in what we listen comes too because we are not even the SPL before and after any change we do and our ears are extremly sensitive to minute SPL changes, this issue is critic on any evaluation/comparation we do on audio. Look here what Ortofon recomend to his customers about impedance subject where you can read is almost totally OPEN the impedance range because they know what I said above. Here too can you read the Lyra recomendation with his SL models : http://www.ortofon.com/hifi/products/hifi-cartridges/mc-anna/technical-data Lyra: """ Recommended load directly into MC phono input: Determine by listening . """ Sometimes those changes in what we listen comes too because we are not even the SPL before and after any change we do and our ears are extremly sensitive to minute SPL changes, this issue is critic on any evaluation we do on audio. The real problem on those changes on tonality or balance in the quality level performance comes mainly because the phono stage design is not really a good design that can't handle the complex impedances/inductances generated when we make changes about. It's not a fault from the SUT or that the cartridge likes or does not likes the changes. As I said is a trade-off coming from the phono stage it self. Is it the SUT a perfect device?, no it's not: it generate its own distotions, it has limtations at both frequency ranges, it's suceptible to takes electro magnetic pollution, generates its own noise levels and some other trade-offs. Then why exist the SUTs as a gain external or internal to phono stages? externally because could be that our PS can't handle LOMC cartridges, we need additional gain that comes with additional distortions including the ones generated by the IC cables and input/output connectors. internal SUT comes because for almost all tube designers is the easiest design way to achieve the cartridge needs gain and in SS designs because that PS was designed thinking on MM cartridges and not LOMC ones or just was what the designer likes it. Now, if we want the best " perfect " quality performance level on any LOMC cartridge then the best SUT is NO SUT. Here we need a good designed active high gain Phonolinepreamp that has not or at least are at really minimum all the SUT limitations that per se goes against that sensitive and critical very low signal that comes from the cartridges. Yes, everything belongs to the quality level design, selected design ( active and passive ) parts and quality level on the design excecution. Btw, the right active device for LOMC cartridges is bipolar one that we don't see it often because bipolars are a " pain in the ass " for this kind of unit designs. Designers on SS and tube designs that don't use bipolars they choose for JFET or the like because is more easy the whole Phonolinepreamp but exist a detriment in the quality levels against the use of bipolars. No, this is not an additional window to " discuss " in this thread. In the past Lyra designers had a Phonolinepreamp with no internal SUT but was an active high gain Phono Stage. JC had very good reasons for that. So, SUTs exist and will exist because something of what I'm posting here. Btw, your sentence: """ . The windings are manually done with enough space """ IMHO this kind of work with a transformer must be achieved by a machine noit manually because manually there is no human been that can stay always not only with the required distance but tension too and other subjects. Anyway, here is my " take " about and of course that I can be wrong but till I learn something " new " from the real experts that's my point of view. Regards and enjoy the music, R. So, if your quality sound level change when using a SUT don't change the SUT but your Phono Stage!. |
Dear @halcro : Please read very carefully here: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/can-i-use-a-step-up-transformer/post?postid=1342503#1342503 because those changes in quality performance level comes from the very complex interaction that produce impedance/inductance internally in the phono stage that can’t handle with aplomb it, not comes from the cartridge that is non-sensitive to those load impedance changes. Problem is in the phono stage that comes with some kind of " faults " by design. Obviously that in an active high gain PS this kind of design is not for use with external SUTs so it’s not a design faulty, the designer made it to use it in the active high gain and not the other way around . The designer in your unit never imagine that some one will use the MM stage along a SUT, so there is a " problem " in that MM stage. The designer of your unit knows very well what I'm explained in this thread and that's why he left in the active MC high gain stage a fixed 220 ohms impedance that you can't change it because is not need it to do it. Please read it. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Btw and for all those audiophiles that like to modify/upgrade by it self electronics like a Phonolinepreamp could be interesting that all them can check with a printed diagram the today RIAA eq. deviation after their modifications and compare it vs before those changes along today distortion levels and its changes. I'm sure they will find a not so nice " surprise " . Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @czarivey : Agree with. If for example an active gain PS was designed for cartridges over 0.3mv and has no MM stage and we want to listen a 0.20 mv cartridge then we need to change, either, the PS or the cartridge with higher output level. As I posted, with LOMC cartridges what we always need is to match Phono Stage gain not impedances. I think that existed and exist a misunderstood ( including me. ) not only on SUTs but in the overall subject. Many vintage SUTs and even today ones comes with the possibility to choose different " load impedance " ( normally a selector switch: 3 ohms and 40 ohms or 20 ohms or whatever. ) and where the selected " impedance " has different gain( 34 db, 26 db or 20 db or whatever. ). Other SUTs only said: 3 ohms to 20 ohms. ALL those created the misunderstood because in a SUT we don't have to match the cartridge impedance with the SUT impedance that as a fact does not exist as we could think. Again, only match gain with the phono stage. Phono stages that comes with a selctor switch for MC load impedance ( normally at th first input stage. ) or/and different gain levels goes against the quality performance level of the cartridge signal: it performs a signal degradation. Overall interaction of all these and the PS design generates several anomalies/distortions even could affect the critical/delicate equilibrium in the passive RIAA eq. frequency response deviation on both channels and certainly we can hear it. @thuchan posted: """ Good systems deserve using SUTs! """ i disagree with. What we need for LOMC cartridge is way better active high gain Phonolinepreamp designs and that's all. I think this is still the real challenge for all designers. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @thuchan : """
sounds simple, but isn't. Using higher output cartridges you are facing several disadvantages you need to tackle at the matching process. """ your statement makes no sense to me or at least makes no sense till you have a real explanation about. Please let me know, if for example: I own an active high gain PS designed for MC cartridges with at least an output of 0.3mv and things are that I own a cartridge with a lower output ( say: 0.20mv. ) that I really can't use it with. Which are those several disadvantages you name it if instead of the low output cartridge I buy and use one with 0.35 mv? """ looks also like a simple solution but isn't too. Otherwise we would have seen designs yet. I am getting the impression this a lot of theoretical talk rather having experimented with excellent MCs and perfect matching SUTs. """ totally false. Nothing of those is only theoretical and in my case I experimented for more years than you with the best vintage and today SUTs and with today and vintage top PS, either SS and tube designs. In the other side we have not more SS high gain active Phonolinepreamp because it's not an easy design task and this is the main reason not you " theoretical " take. """ A perfect matched SUT is not only able to provide the gain one needs, it also gives a more profound, stable, dynamic and deep sound structure, in comparison to some Phono pres which provide thin air. """ with all my respect to you another " false " statements and no-sense ones.Thin air? that could be because a not first rate active high gain PS design. What seems to me is that you speak for your own experiences that tell me for sure that you never experimented with a first rate active high gain PLP and that's why you are " hidden " between a bad PS alond SUTs. Believe me tehre is no " magic " down there but that you like those higher distortions. As always, at the end we can't kill distortions. """ facing two coils looking at each other, the one of the cart, the other of the SUT. You need harmonizing both .... """ where do you learn this because IMHO is " false " too. That's is really a simplistic point of view with no facts. Where are those facts? Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @halcro : All of us have to deal with each one audio system distortions, this is the real " name of the game ". I mentioned in my last post only because @thuchan gives no facts/explanation to his statements. Additional @thuchan posted: """ personal conclusion is you need an excellent phono stage like the EMT JPA 66 or the Boulder 2008 avoiding SUTs .. """ after this he posted SUT alternative is a better one but even if he did not posted this he gave two PLP that he took as his references on active high gain designs and for me that I listened one of them neither is a real reference. One of these units is all tube design and with several other negative factors too. I prefer by a wide margin the unit you own that I know very well. He posted too: """ I found quite some limitations with ’active’ phono stages that ’passive’ SUTs overcome. """ with out explain those limitations and he told me that my comments are theoretical, go figure! In the other side @thuchan is talking about the use of external SUTs. Coming from him this makes no sense to me. Makes sense to you? I insist on an explanation from his part because I think he could have something really new in his hands that my ignorance level can’t understand and as always I’m willing to learn especially in an analog subject so critical, sensitive and important. I’m sure that he can put some true light here in benefit of all of us music lovers and audiophiles. Tha’s all. Regards and enjoy the music, R. PS.: Btw, I’m not against SUTs per se ( even I’m using now. ), things are that I’m in favor of MUSIC. Nothing else. |
Dear @john_tracy : The example per se was not the subject and only a reference to know which explanation has the gentleman that posted: """ Using higher output cartridges you are facing several disadvantages you need to tackle at the matching process. """ Maybe you need to read again some of the posts in this tread to understand it better. In the other side you can't diminsh in any way those " only 3.5 db down " because we are not talking here to listen " only sound " but about top quality level sound reproduction. """ compensate with the volume control .. """" but this is not the main subject ( again. ) because at the performance level we are talking here we don't want higher noise/distortions but to stay at minimum. 3.5dbs means that the PLP needs to double the power and if the PLP was designed for at least 0.3mv output cartridges then its specs/overall characteristics could change in dramatic way. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @thuchan : So have you answers to all those simple questions that coming from what you posted and where you did not any explanation? My question here is: have you specific answers or not ? and if not its ok, no problem but just tell us about one way or the other. Don't be " shy ". regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @john_tracy : Yes, mi mistake. I was thinking other thing and out of focus. Anyway, increment in noise means lower dynamic range and noise is a kind of distortion too that we don't want it in any way. We don't want chage the original characteristics. In the other side normally PLP manufacturer gives the unit specs at certain " levels " and almost no one gives specs/characteristics at full output and the manufacturer normally try that active and passive parts on his units stay at " safe " area and problem is that not all manufacturers takes provision of this and its parts instead to stay at 50% of the active/passive part manufacturer specs works ( normally ) at 80%+ of its intrinsec capacities and this is a problem against: " distortions at minimum " and for the PLP stay on manufacturer specs. Yes, a designed PLP ( Phonolinepreamp ) for cartridges with at least 0.3mv can handle cartridges not even with 0.2mv but 0.15mv or 0.1mv but we have to " pay " for it: higher distortions. This is the real subject not only those numbers you are talking about. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @thuchan : This is what you can read in the Lyra cartridge site: """ Most users (and phono stages) will benefit from the regular Etna with much higher output and considerably more energy; resulting in a much better signal-to-noise ratio. If you are in doubt about which version of Etna that will work best in your system, please go with the regular Etna. The Etna SL may provide extra pure and pristine sound from an audio system that is optimized for a low-impedance, low-output cartridge. However, this may be accompanied with a lesser level of energy and power. """ That is what J.Carr said for all his 3 " low output " models ( Atlas, Etna and Kleos. ) that in reality are not so low output: 0.25 mv. The reguklar versions: 0.5mv. Look what he said: "" may provide extra pure and pristine sound from an audio system that is optimized for a low-impedance, low-output cartridge. However, this may be accompanied with a lesser level of energy and power """ Could exist some exceptions depending of the PLP design but more gain in a PLP design makes " compromises " too and not only to deal with noise but other kind of distortions coming many times for the necessity to use additional gain stages in the PLP design as in its power suply design and some other factors. Things are not so easy as you posted. Yes, a 0.20mv cartridge ( everything the same ) can performs ( in theory ) better as the same model with 0.50mv but JC noted that the system must be optimized for! I think that 95%+ systems did not even JC statement. So, in my example about is better to buy a higher output cartridge or spend a lot of money for the right PLP that can handle with high quality level the low output cartridge. In the other side, I posted to you several tiemes ( in this thread. ) that what we need to match is the rigth SUT gain with the PLP and not to the cartridge that is not sensitive to changes on impedances and capacitance because the LOMC cartridges has very low internal impedance and inductance so cartridge does not cares about the SUT in that regards. A LOMC cartridge could be sensitive to impedance/capacitance changes when these values are extremely high/low but with the values usually happens in an audio systems the cartridge is " non-sensitive " to those changes and if not sensitive then where comes the quality level changes some of us can hear. I already said it: comes from the internal interactions in the PLP design. I posted that for every single evaluation before/after the SPL must be evenly because our ears are really sensitive to minute SPL. Changes on impedance can drop/high SPL with the same cartridge and if the PLP is a good design what we listen as " changes " are not really a change in the cartridge quality level performance but only changes in the PLP SPLs. Btw, I like almost any good LOMC cartridge design, vintage and today. With my PLP I don't need to use a SUT because it can handle any LOMC cartridge directly with no single trade offs I posted. I tested several SUTs and as a fact I own several ones because I just want it to try and compare against active designs. Again, a very good active high gain PLP design always beats a PLP with a SUT in its design or using an external SUT. Regards and enjoy tghe music, R. |
As you can see all belongs to audio devices kind level of design. In the output level cartridge subject it's the same. You can listen to the Lyra Etna with 0.5mv against the Ortofon A95/Anna that has 0.2mv and I'm sure that you will happy with any one of them it does not matters its output level differences and this means that is the overall design what really counts. I don't buy or prefer LOMC cartridges because its low or very low output but because its overall quality performance level. I own cartridges coming from 0.05mv to o.6mv and I like all of them. I hope you can find a top ( really top ) active high gain SS PLP and forget about SUTs. Yes is " fun " to play/tests with but no more than that. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear @thuchan /friends: """
and use the MM input with appropriate SUTs. You will be surprised what results you will hear and maybe you will change your opinion quickly. """ Perhaps no so quickly but I need to say that all over my posts in this thread I was looking almost only what happens in my system with out leave my " eyes " to see the overall audiophile world. Yes, the active high gain phonolinepreamp alternative could be or is the best way to go but those kind of units are really rare in the market especially true and real good phonolinepreamps designs and the few that exist has a way huge/high tag price that almost no one can pay for it. So the SUT alternative is the real alternative either as an external option to a MM only phono stages or integrated in LOMC phono stage designs. This is what almost all of us can find out/buy in the analog whole market and I think is the market mark for the years to comes. In all my posts here and elsewhere I never said SUTs sounds wrong because it did not as a fact a PS + SUT sounds good and some times sounds very good and I can live with if necessary. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
