MC phono stage without transformer?

Dear Plinko, Build it yourself, if you feel that strongly about expensive SUT-less phono stages. It can be done for far far less than $3K. There are schematics galore on-line. For example, check out the Vacuum State website. AW shows the schematics of many of his best designs there. But meantime, it's a bit unfair and very inaccurate to infer that those of us who use expensive phono stages cannot also be "music lovers".

There is so much more to it than just assembling the parts. I'm sure that Nick Doshi, Ralph, Jim Hagermann, Jose, etc., all started off as DIY'ers. So what are you really paying for (exclude any marketing for the sake of discussion) when you buy equipment from these folks? The answer is their invaluable experiences. I do agree that you can get very good results with DIY projects and kits. And, you can get very good results using quality SUTs. Maybe it won't be world class performance, but as long as the music it recreates sounds good to you what else matters?

Before we analogers get too busy wringing our hands over the cost of performance, take some time and read the digital forums about what is happening to CD transports. If you don't spend thousands all you get is a cheap, PC-style transport in a pretty box that may not be supported a few years after you buy it. I think that in comparison the future is very bright for vinyl.

I attended one of Roy Gregory's demos of (among other things) equalization issues and their remedy with the Zanden. The differences are not well explain IMHO by merely the vagaries of mastering. I also researched a bit the RIAA standard and when it was adopted, and though 1954-55 is the date the pre-emphasis curve was 'adopted', there are comments that it was not universally used by all until years later, perhaps in some cases more than a decade later.

It is also not implausible that some existing mastering suites were slow to use the RIAA curve, for reasons of cost and convenience. I'm speculating here, but given how well the alternate playback curves worked in improving timbre at the demo, I think these LPs were mastered with the older curves they were used to using. This contention is bolstered a bit by the observation that this isn't found on just a few LPs of the label, but seems pervasive with a label, e.g. DGG recordings of the late 50s and early 60s often seem 'muffled', with apparent roll-offs at the top and too much lower midrange which deadens string tone among other things -- when using RIAA de-emphasis that is. (At some point this changed.) Perhaps it was also assumed that few people would honestly hear the difference, or know why it was there, or there was a concern that loyal customers of the label were already using 'their' playback curve and they didn't want to disturb their customer base.

In any case, I think that for serious collectors who have many non-US recordings of the 50s and 60s, a phono stage with more de-emphasis choices is desirable. Tony Cordesman reached the same conclusion when reviewing the re-do of the Citation I preamp. This unit might be a good choice, though it may lack ultimate clarity and transparency which to me reduces its appeal. YMMV.

Jeff

Dear Plinko: +++++ " What a surprise! " +++++

You have at least one additional option named MM cartridges type that with the right set up could make wonders for your music sound reproduction and you don't need at all any SUT.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

lewm, no such inference should be made from my comments. big apologies! there are no hard and fast rules to defining a music lover. although, i would suggest that if your budget on equipment and music isn't in the stratosphere (90% of audiophiles), then choosing say, a $10K phonostage is choosing the path of the audiophile and not the music lover. additionally, one's system will also have to be comprised of similar statosphere products to achieve full benefit such a costly phono stage. without going the DIY route. and as Atmasphere pointed out, the more resolving your system is, the easier it is to hear the colorations of the transformer. logic would indicate that in most real world yet audiophile based systems, transformer less designs are not a priority. i would also say that $10K for a phonostage is not prohibitive to some. it is prohibitive to most.

i don't know original poster Viper, his/her price range, and whether his/her system is appropriate for one of those stages. did anyone ask?

thanks, I will check out that diy site.

btw, i have no allegiance to transformer less phono stages. in fact, quite the opposite. i have tried three highly regarded stages priced at what I would call the affordable range (less than $3K) and they all were sterile compared to the tubes & transformer sound. The Klyne was the best of them and I could easily live with that one. The others were ASR and Pass. Really nice equipment but not my preference. Both methods can bring great sound. i can't deny the experience of others with very pricey transormerless phono stages. i don't have that experience.

PS. i'm starting to think that if a tree falls and nobody hears it, it didn't fall. and if very few heard said tree fall, the sound it made isn't all that relevant or important.