Phono Stage upgrade to complement Dohmann Helix One Mk 2

Specifically, I have found that I favor OTL tube amplifiers to drive full-range ESL speakers.  This category does not include conventional transformer coupled tube amplifiers.  Why add another coupling transformer where it is not needed? A further qualification is that I made my original judgements based on ESLs that were available in the 70s and 80s, to include KLH9s and Quad 57s, and a few others.  Later on in history, several speaker makers, SL included, made a decision to design crossover networks or input stages for their ESLs that made them a more favorable load for solid state amplifiers.  I have not liked such speakers as much as I liked the early high impedance ESLs, whether driven by tubes or by SS amplification.  For another example, the very first M-L ESL, the CLS, with a 16 ohm impedance, was made in heaven for the Futterman amplifiers I then owned.  I enjoyed them for several years. Then M-L messed with the input stage to lower impedance for SS amplifiers, and the resulting CLS IIs lost all the glory of the original, regardless of how you drove it. I am very happy having removed the crossover parts from my SL speakers that wasted amplifier power across a resistor and that artificially lowered input Z to favor SS amplifiers.  I am quite happy with what I have now in my PX845s, and I commend Dr West for modifying his speaker line in accordance with solving the problem they had.  I plead guilty to all of the above.  Now, will you admit that the very thought of a vacuum tube makes you have conniptions?  The JC1s plain and simple do not hold a candle to the Atma-sphere amplifiers I own for driving my current version of the 845PXs; if they were better sounding, I would have kept them.  Believe it or don't.

Enjoy the Music reviewer on the OP model:

 

"  The company claims that the speaker requires only 60 Watts to perform to its high standards, though my experience sheds some doubt on the usefulness of this figure. The Pass Labs A-250 Class A amplifier, which was otherwise a tonally wonderful match for the speaker, was unable to control the speaker's bottom end satisfactorily. In this regard, the Merrill VERITAS mono-bloc amplifiers at 400/watts a side proved far more to the speaker's liking. "

At the end really don't care about because I don't own those speakers but I listened and are very good ones.

R.

 

R.

lewm always argument something with " wrong " questions as this to myjos:

" You have heard the JC1 and the Hyperion driving the same pair of Sound Lab speakers in the same room with the same upstream gear? "

First mijos was not talking of the old JC1 but today JC1+ that's way different and maybe he never read the MF review along the measurements on the Hyperion amps where we can read:

by MF:

" 

No doubt the single tube in the Hyperion's signal path subtly greased the musical proceedings with a smooth yet transparent overlay of richness. Having become acclimated in recent years years to the sound of the darTZeel NHB-458, which is less generous in the upper bass and lower midrange (detractors of solid-state designs might describe its sound as "thin") and is faster in the transient realm (detractors might say "overly and unrealistically sharply drawn"), the gross distinctions between these two great performers were easily audible..........

But even while the contours of the new sound were still easily definable and the differences between the two amplifiers were still clear...."

 

and JA measurements comments:

 

" 

While the Hyperion's input impedance is specified as a moderately high 47k ohms, my measurements indicated a lower value at low and middle frequencies: just over 21k ohms for both the balanced and unbalanced inputs. This is still high enough not to be an issue, but at 20kHz the impedance dropped to just 3k ohms, which will be marginal with some preamplifiers, rolling off the top octave. Fortunately, this shouldn't have affected Michael Fremer's listening, given his associated equipment: His Ypsilon PST-100 preamplifier has a low output impedance, and his darTZeel preamplifier has a fairly uniform, if high, output impedance across the audioband.

Despite the Hyperion's large number of output devices, its output impedance was relatively high for a solid-state design, at 0.35 ohm. As a result, the modification of the amplifier's frequency response with our standard simulated loudspeaker reached ±0.25dB (fig.1, gray trace). Of more concern is the ultrasonic peak in the Hyperion's response, centered between 40 and 50kHz and reaching 2dB in height. The peak gave rise to a single damped cycle of oscillation with a 10kHz squarewave (fig.2) and was not affected by the load impedance, which suggests that it occurs before the output stage, perhaps at the input transformer. 

 

 However, as figs. 3–5 reveal, at our usual definition of clipping, at which the THD+noise reaches 1%, the Hyperion delivered 239W into 8 ohms (23.8dBW), 400W into 4 ohms (23dBW), and 315W into 2 ohms (19dBW). It did meet its specified power when I relaxed the definition of clipping to between 1.4% and 2% THD+N, but these are disappointing results.

 

Of more concern in these graphs is the Hyperion's linear increase in distortion with increasing power output above a few hundred milliwatts. While the THD+N percentage remains acceptably low below 10W or so, above that power, and especially at low frequencies, it reaches levels that will be audible with continuous pure tones...

When MF comments on "the immediately obvious added harmonic and textural richness," that it is what I would expect from this distortion signature. In addition, the Hyperion's intermodulation distortion was not as low as I would have liked.

Given that, it is not an amplifier that I would recommend, especially given its price. While I have found that power amplifiers tend to sound different from one another, I feel they should be engineered to be as close to neutrally balanced as possible, and not designed to produce a "tailored" sound, as the Hyperion seems to be.—

 

Obviously dover made the same that lewm in this specific matter. As I said, knowledge levels is the " name of the game ".

R.

 

 

@dover

I have to agree with you: measurements are only a guide. I am personally not convinced that we know enough about hearing to rely definitively on measurements. For instance, I have played several stringed instruments, and I have observed that when one string is played, it’s not just that string that vibrates and intonates sound, but you also get a minor vibration of any strings in that same note, usually one octave higher, which would be the second harmonic, if I’m not mistaken. Interestingly, this is the same harmonic that the Ypsilon Hyperions accentuate when pushed to the limit, which sounded very good (in fact, the best I have ever heard); however, the measurements demonstrate this as distortion.

@mijostyn

Yes, I’m sure the JC1+ are great amplifiers, but I doubt they could hold much to either the Lamm M2.2 (which, by the way, are also excellent amplifiers) or the Ypsilon Hyperion. If someone wants to ship me a pair to central Florida, I’l listen with an open mind and report back. . .

@rauliruegas

You are no doubt very knowledgeable, and probably know more about specifications and engineering than most people here. However, the data can only reveal what we currently measure. I think it’s important to consider that we don’t know enough about sound to know everything to measure or how to measure it fully. While analyzing data is definitely a strength of yours, I’m of the opinion that the data can sometimes be misleading, and incomplete, and listening to the Hyperions seems to confirm my opinion, despite Atkinson’s measurements.

 

Now, if anyone can recommend any other current-based phono stages, with two MC inputs, I’m all ears!

@lewm , I heard Hyperions on big Wilsons in comparison with Boulder 2150s. I preferred the Boulders. The two most popular amps with SoundLabs users are Atma-Sphere MA 2s and  JC 1s for whatever it is worth.

@drbond I have never heard or seen a Lamm amp so I can not comment but you are very wrong about the JC 1+. John Curl's point with the JC 1 was that he can make a top amp for much more reasonable money. I wish I could send you a pair. There is much more involved in the pricing of audio gear than the quality of the parts and engineering.  What is left has nothing to do with the sound quality of the equipment. John Curl has a record that is hard to ignor. People do not want to hear that an $18,000 amp is better engineered than their $90,000 amp. So be it. My personal goal is to get Atma-Shere MA 2's a $45,000 amp which due to their design are a perfect mate for Soundlabs speakers. I would love to get MA 3s but at $145,000 I would never get them by my wife. On the other hand with the price of propane we could use the extra heat next Winter:-)

@rauliruegas , my feelings exactly. I am going with whatever produces the best results. You should look into Channel D's Pure Vinyl program. It is a lot of fun. You can compare different versions of a recording and different equipment in the analog chain, cartridges and tonearms. Very enlightening.

Dear @drbond : " However, the data can only reveal what we currently measure. I think it’s important to consider that we don’t know enough about sound to know everything to measure or how to measure it fully. "

 

Yes, data is what we measure. What’s wrong with that? and yes till today does not exist measurement proccess that can tell us how an amp can sound but this fact does not means that today we can diminish measures like in the past like the corrupted AHEE teached to us.

J.Atkinson is not a simple mesurement gentleman he was an analog lover till 10-15 years ago when he learned about and left it, it’s a very well regarded reviewer and it’s one with a lot more honesty than other reviewers ( he can’t recomend the Hyperions when MF did it. What a difference ! ! ! ) and it’s a recording engineer.

It’s ovbious that any gentleman that spends 90K+ in an audio item be at defensive attitude against facts with not very good quality design in that audio item.

 

But this is not only about measurements but about common sense. Ypsilon likes transformers and almost all is transformer coupled and that fact means that the audio signal travel for those " hundreds " of meters of transformers wires that certainly damage that audio signal and I said common sense because almost a rule is that we connect the tonearm to the phono stage input with the shorter IC cable to let at minimum degradation signal issues and here we are speaking of 1m. now imagine if the audio signal must travel over " hundred " of wire meters. Higher distortions that you like and is fine with me.

Common sense tells not spend high K $$$ to achieve top quality level in the cartridge signal only for that valuable cartridge signal be destroyed in the next system links. That’s all and is up to you because in this thread all gentlemans already gave you a lot of choices many of them with out that " common sense ".

Btw, FR on the Hyperion against load speaker impedance . This is a fact not imagination or subjective:

 

Anyway, enough.

R.

 

 

 

 

Fremer is listening without measuring. Atkinson is measuring without critical listening. Thus they offer two entirely different perspectives. The reader needs to make up his own mind based on the total information.

This sidebar has nothing to do with phono stages.

This is not the only example where a reviewer speaks wonders on an audio item and measurements says NO it’s not true.

 

I remember that years ago that same magazyne and same gentlemans made the review/measurements of the over 60K Vitus phono stage and the reviewer said that the unit had really good and tigth low bass but that unit ( if I remmeber ) design use the IEC RIAA eq. that makes that from around 50hz the bass goes very quich down/fall. There are more examples/facts.

 

Measures can tell us a lot of things on any audio electronics items IF we are willing to accept it. That IF is the big problem for we audiophiles/MUSIC lovers.

 

R.

lewm, certainly it has to do with phono stage because this unit will be inserted in an audio system. You confirm what I said: no common sense to help OP in this thread or any other thread. As you are accusto to: always argumentative. No problem.

In one of the last theads in this forum the OP ask for advise to change his cartridge and his budget was 2K-3K.

Well, the very first post was from a gentleman with common sense trying to help the OP:

 

" You would be better off buying a better quality phono stage first................."

 

Followed by other two audiophiles with a +1.  This is what I'm talking about: HELP other people.

 

R.

Since you are the sole repository of "common sense", in your opinion, and since your opinions are all over this thread, why would you say there is no common sense here?

I shouldn't bother to respond, but I cannot resist pointing out that I said nothing, zero, in support of or in criticism of the Hyperion amplifiers, because I did admit from the beginning that I had never heard a pair, much less even seen a pair.  I didn't even know whether they were solid state or tube based until now.  I have heard a Ypsilon phono stage in my neighbor's system with which I was very familiar, and it was stellar in that context.  Drawbacks are that it provides only 39db of phono gain and so far as I know has only one pair of inputs.

I did compare the JC1s to my Atma-sphere amplifiers because I briefly owed a pair of JC1s and have always owned the Atma-sphere amps, it seems.  And I compared them on my home system. My question to Mijostyn about the context in which he made a comparison of the JC1 to the Hyperion is a perfectly valid one, and it's a question of the kind you often ask as well, when someone offers an opinion on a cartridge.  In fact, for anyone to say "I like A better than B" without giving some context is worthless. Mijostyn was kind enough to respond to the question; your judgement of the quality of my question (argumentative) was uncalled for. I wasn't addressing you.

This thread that was supposed to be about top of the line phono stages has temporarily morphed into a thread about amplifiers. . .

@rauliruegas

Of course I was aware of the so-called "weakness" of the Ypsilon Hyperions before I bought them. Importantly, the distortion that is graphed in your picture is linear, and only at very high frequency. Distortion in musical instruments is also rather linear, so the amplifier seems well designed for music.  (Distortion in most solid state amplifiers, as I'm sure you're aware is dramatically geometric, and that's why solid state can sound so bad at the extremes.)

By your critique of transformers, it seems that you need to learn how transformers actually work.

I suppose a good summary of this last part of this discussion is that we don’t know as much as some people think that we know, and that includes engineers and doctors.

@drbond 

@lewm ​​​​@rauliruegas are always disagreeing over something or other - lol

if you must by tube try a Tron. Supremely musical. Graham Tricker makes some very fine valve gear (and i don't like valves). I think they have 2 inputs. I dont think they have adjustable curves though.

@drbond  : " most solid state amplifiers, as I'm sure you're aware is dramatically geometric, and that's why solid state can sound so bad at the extremes. "

I respect your opinion and maybe you are talking of SS electronics coming from the " old " times. TODAY what makes the differences for the better in SS over tube alternative are precisely the excellent wide and accurated frequency extremes ! ! !

along its very low noise and distortion levels with extremely low output impedance.  

R.

 

@drbond  : Why don't go with the myjostin phono stage advise the : L20?

 

R.

Please don't distress because its extremely low price.

R.

 

No one of them in your price range but ....! ! ! ! 

 

R.

@rauliruegas 

Thanks for your phono stage recommendations.  I haven't looked at the details of those three that you recommended.  Are they all current based phono stages?  
Thanks. 

@drbond  : No, not current design but very good performers.

 

This Agoner just bougth two phono stages one voltage and one current designs and at least his preview of a top current design was not very good against the other new voltage design unit:

I think that if you are biased to the current designs you need to listen the unit you want against a voltage new unit in the same room/system and with your cartridges.

The advantage with today good top voltage designs is that we can't go wrong with.

R.

@rauliruegas

I personally have not investigated the purported benefits of a current design vs voltage design in the phono stage, however, most on this forum seem to indicate that a current design will be more precise and detailed due to the effect on the MC cartridge, if I’m not mistaken.
I personally, hold no bias towards either design, but I am simply looking to purchase the best sounding phono stage that isn’t insanely priced, given my system. No doubt, I will have to audition different items before purchase in order to make a reliable decision.
Thanks.

 

@rauliruegas 

Thanks for sharing the recommendation of the DSA phono III.  I think a few others had recommended that one as well, and I'm sure it's an excellent phono stage, but the first sentence of the review sums it up for me:  it is not the sonic equal of the CH Precision P1. . . 

Thanks. 

Rather than dwelling too much on Speciication, try to listen to them.

 

Another suggestion would be:

CS-Port

Allnic

Aries Cerat

@dover

Well, I finally had some time to read that review (from the links that you posted previously) of various high end phono stages, written in Chinese.

I think much must’ve been lost in translation, and after reading his review of the Manley Steelhead, I’m not sure how much credence I would give to this reviewer: he specifically says that the Manley is great for large orchestral pieces, and mediocre for piano and chamber music. My experience has been the exact opposite?! Listening to piano music through the Manley Steelhead, I have a hard time not believing that the piano is in the room with me, and a concert pianist, who has listened to my system, agrees! Chamber music is equally exceptional with the combination of the Manley Steelhead and the Dohmann Helix One Mk2.  (Perhaps the difference can be attributed to the NOS tubes that I'm using, as opposed to the stock tubes included in the Steelhead, or perhaps to system synergies.)

I found the reviewer’s conclusion by comparing the different phono stages to different types of idealized Chinese women quite difficult to relate to, being an American myself, but it was nonetheless intriguing.
The reviewer seemed to strongly favor the FM223, but recognized that it didn’t have enough gain for many systems. He also preferred the Trinity Phono Stage, and the Audio Note M3, although his descriptions of various advantages and disadvantages of the various phono stages was poorly worded in translation.

Nevertheless, thanks for sharing that review!

@drbond  : "strongly favor the FM223, but recognized that it didn’t have enough gain for many systems. ""

 

Well, those gentlemans ignore that FMA can give you the 223 with the gain you can need it.

 

R.

New Nagra HD Phono PreamplifierNagra writes: "Year after year we are pursuing our quest of excellence by developing ambitious product to complement our lines. Following the Classic PHONO and largely developed in parallel, the Nagra HD PHONO will release in September 2022. We are extremely happy to show it for the very first time. It encompasses Nagra HD Line DNA with a separate vibration controlled housing on suspensions. It is a double-mono, tube based preamplifier with 70 dB of gain and wide range of fine settings to extract the most of your cartridge."

So, I made a purchase of a phono stage, and I bought the CH Precision P1 phono stage with X1 power supply.  Thanks to everyone for their contribution to this thread, and to my education.  I especially appreciate the recommendations of those who brought my attention to this new technology in current-based phono stages.  I wouldn't have had any idea about this new type of phono stage without several of your contributions. 

 

After a week or listening, I am very impressed with the sound quality of the device, and it sounds worlds better than the Manley Steelhead, which was and is a very good phono stage. 

 

I really do like the idea of the current-based operation of a phono stage, and I was always somewhat philosophically disturbed by how variable loading could affect the sound of LP's and cartridges, but I wasn't aware of any other options.  With the CH Precision, the gain is the only variable, and it comes with a record and a "gain wizard" software that selects the best gain for each cartridge played, based on certain parameters.  Additionally, if I wanted to use an SUT with my MC, or use an MM, I could use the MM/MC input on the device, and there are supposedly 500 different loadings possible in the CH Precision P1, all the way from 20 ohms to 100k ohms, and a "loading wizard" software with a record can help select the best loading for the cartridge also. 

 

As for the sound, it's quite amazing:  the musicality is still very present, but the clarity and detail are present on a much greater scale.  It is most noticeable with larger, orchestral pieces, where the sound stage and separation of the instruments is much greater.  There's not as significant an improvement with solo pieces:  while the sound quality is definitely improved, and clearer; the slight distortion that the Manley Steelhead created was very musically pleasing with solo instruments. 

 

If I could criticize the unit, I would say that it is almost too precise, clear, and detailed, which does remove some bit of the musicality of the performance (when operating the device at what the "gain wizard" software considers to be the "optimal" gain).  Another difference that I notice is that the presentation is such that instead of making you feel like the performers are in my home, it makes me feel like I am at the performance, or recording studio. 

 

Interestingly, the "gain wizard" software on the P1 selected the "optimal" gain to be +15 db for both the Lyra and Koetsu cartridges into the MC current input.  (The selected gain is based on the internal resistance of the MC cartridge.)  At this gain, the music is very detailed, precise, accurate, but I perceive it to be slightly bright.  In my opinion, this accuracy and brightness is due to the gain chosen by the "gain wizard".  When I select the gain myself, based upon what I appreciate as natural music, I choose a gain of 0 db.  At 0 db gain, the P1 is not only still very detailed and accurate, but also thoroughly musical.  Listening to any performance, I get the impression that I am at the performance, and everything sounds as real as it would, without any of the larger than life "bloom" that I get from the Manley Steelhead.  However, I must admit, I do sometimes enjoy that large "bloom," while recognizing that it is some degree of distortion.  This perceived perfect sonic balance at 0 db gain may also be due to using my Ypsilon PST-100 Mk2 SE in passive mode at maximum volume, which is approximately 0 db attenuation.  So, my current assessment is:  0 db gain with 0 db attenuation = ideal, realistic sound quality. 

 

Playing the P1 unit by itself lends a lean, clean sound, and it sounds excellent, but adding the X1 power supply does add a robustness to the sound. 

 

In the coming months, I plan on connecting the MC cartridges to the voltage-based MM/MC input, and playing with the loading wizard, and comparing the sonic differences, as compared to the current-based MC input. 

The Manley Steelhead can be vastly upgraded by replacing the output coupling capacitors. I am certainly not about to claim that doing so would result in it sounding as good as the CH1, but it is a worthwhile alteration.

Congrats on your purchase!!

Well, there’s not much like a new turntable and phono stage to leave room for adjustments:  a member suggested that I adjust the VTA because of the brightness I was hearing, so I lowered the tonearm about 0.75 mm, and the brightness that I previously heard is gone.  I am now running full gain (25db) through the current mode MC input, and it sounds great, very sonorous, and without that brightness.  The “gain wizard” software still suggests to run at 15db gain, based on the test record included with the phono stage, but I guess I figure that if 15db is good, 25db must be better!  
With the gain increased, it sounds like I moved from the mid-back of the auditorium to the front.

Thanks for everyone’s recommendations!

Dear @drbond  : Well time to enjoy MUSIC, good ! ! !

 

Only to understand that current mode PS designs has no real advantage with any LOMC cartridge. This post came from a person with high knowledge technical levels and through his post puts true ligth on that current vs voltage kind of designs, read carefully especialyy its conclusion:

R.

Dear @drbond  : You said that your manual 25db gain set up like you the more that what was the CH gain choosed for that cartridge .

 

However the CH calculated gain has an advantage:

 

" The P1 comes with a test LP designed to work with the P1's internal distortion analyzer. With the test LP playing, the P1 Gain Wizard will read the test signal and automatically choose a gain level which yields the lowest signal to noise ratio.  "

 

You posted if 15db is good 25db must be better and maybe is not that way.

 

In the other side are you listen it with the standard inverse RIAA eq. or with the Neumann pole?

Btw, that brigthness that you did not like it sounded with both cartridges you own?

 

R.

@drbond  : I hope/could understand that the listening  SPL from the speakers stays the same with or with out the changes you did it. Is it that way?

 

R.

 

 

@rauliruegas

Yes, while playing the test record the P1 gain wizard started at 0db, while playing the test LP, then jumped to 5db, then 10db, then 15db, and stopped at 15db. It didn’t proceed to test any higher gain setting. I’m still listening at 25db, but perhaps I need to revisit, and listen the 15db gain more critically. At 25db, I think it sounds great, but I really should do a better job researching the differences, and I will over the next 3-6 months, but right now I’m just enjoying listening my LP’s with new ears.

With the increased gain settings, of course I can listen with a higher speaker SPL, but I try to keep it within realistic sound levels, but being closer to the front, the sound is louder than sitting in the middle of the concert hall.  With the gain set at 0, I had the volume on the pre-amplifier on maximum, but with the gain set at 25, I have the volume set right in the middle, but the SPL is louder with the increased gain, and decreased volume setting on the pre-, but possibly only up to 70 db SPL instead of 55-60 db SPL.  I don't know if they're related, but it is my understanding that the gain was selected based on the internal resistance in the MC cartridge, and not necessarily based on the SNR.  

There was minimal brightness with the other tonearm, but I lowered that one about 0.5mm, and there is no brightness with either tonearm presently. (Eventually, I ended up lowering the first tonearm by about 3mm, after first lowering it about 1mm.) I’ve also been playing with the azimuth a bit, and I do have the AnalogMagik software that I can plug in, but right now I’m just using my ears.
Thanks.

Dear @drbond : About speaker SPLs what I tryed to say is that in my case when I tests a new audio item in my system I try always that the measured SPLs coming from the speakers at seat position been evenly ( as I can. ) the SPLs during the listening test sessions before and after the test of new audio item. It’s healthy to do it that way because our ears are very sensitive to minuscle SPL changes and those little SPL changes could makes that the new item like it or dislike it more than the " old " one.

 

In the other side the nalizer inside the CH takes the new cartridge impedance parameter and after modeling internally tells you due to the overall characteristics of the CH quality design/performance which gain level is the better with that cartridge and obviously that does not takes in count if you like it or not. It’s a test/fact/objective.

Yes, the AnalogMagik tool can help you.

 

R.

@rauliruegas 

So, I set up the AnalogMagik software today, and it did help me adjust the azimuth.  I was able to get the Lyra Atlas cartridge to have a -28.4 cross talk in both L and R channels.  Oddly, the VTA didn't work with the Lyra Atlas, as it read 6-8%, and the software says that if the reading is above 5%, it might not work for that cartridge.  (The Koetsu was down around 2%).  Another oddity was the gain selector on the AnalogMagik software:  it selected 15db also, but that's only because the CLIP SIGNAL light went from green to red on the USB Phono Plus computer interface machine when I selected 20db. . . I suppose that's the same reason that the CH P1 software also stopped at 15db.  Would I hear anything adversely by having the gain so high that the clip signal light turns red on that computer interface machine?
Thanks. 

So here's some follow up on the CH Precision P1 (run in current mode) gain settings from the Analog Magik software:  at 15db gain, the SNR = 21db; at 20db gain, the SNR = 23db; at 25db gain, the SNR = 20.5db.  

At 20db gain, sometimes the CLIP SIGNAL light would flicker green, but was mostly red.  Apparently, Analog Magik favors a 20db gain. . . I'll have to play some more with this.  

Dear @drbond  : "  Would I hear anything adversely by having the gain so high.."

The best for you is to ask  directly to AnalogMagik.

 

In the other side that " oddly " VTA with the Atlas is something that you have to ask for too. I don't know if that could means that you have to " play " a little with the cartridge VTA till be inside that 5% range limit even that you set up the Atlas VTA where you like it the more.

 

R.

Interesting - I don't profess to know much about AnalogMagik, but a cursory look raises a few issues that I think could be cause for concern -

AudioMagik believes the optimal gain level is the one which yields the highest Signal to Noise ratio."

This is not right. You need to look at gain in the context of the system.

There are 2 aspects to consider.

Cartridge interface to phono

It is quite easy when matching low output mc cartridges with high gain phono stages, to overload the phono, particularly at ultrasonic frequencies - leading to sound quality issues that are more about gain matching than cartridge set up.

Even if the overloading is at ultrasonic frequencies supposedly outside the "audible range", artefacts of ultrasonic overload may impact back down in the audible range.

Therefore you only want enough gain in the phono to obtain the optimum balance between low noise floor, decent headroom, natural dynamics and enough output to drive the next stage at its optimal level. Remember the line stage optimum level is also dependent on the sensitivity and load characteristics of the succeeding stage - in this case power amp.

Phono to Line Stage

Too much gain into the next stage could lead to overload. So for example, you might have a high SNR from a phono using high gain, but at a cost.

Ordinarily it should be hard to overload a competent line stage - however if a phono is outputting distortion at ultra high frequency into an active line stage with poor overload margins at those frequencies - hey presto you have a problem - and the optimum in this case may be lower gain, giving up SNR, may be of benefit.

Similarly if driving a passive line stage, insufficient gain may cause other issues down the chain - loss of dynamics for example, poor signal to noise ratio into the power amp.

In my view you should use Analogmagik as a guide, for better understanding of whats going on, but ultimately should select gain by ear, balancing low noise versus adequately driving each succeeding stage without overload nor insufficient load.

In @drbond s case, experimenting with the CH Precision gain in tandem with  his line stage may yield an optimum result above or below the CH recommended gain.

Trust your ears - if I'm looking to find optimum gain settings between components I am looking for the most natural presentation - not dull, not hyped.

Same with their loading suggestions -

AM has you play pink noise (noise with equal energy per octave) and displays the frequency response, both raw and smoothed, between 20Hz and 24kHz. In the graph, muddy will be indicated by elevated bass or low mid frequencies. Bright will display as elevated treble. AM's 'just right' loading is when the smoothed frequency response graph is flattest.  

Again there is an assumption that flat frequency response is optimal.

It may not be. There may be downsides of trying to flatten the frequency response, the cure may be worse than the remedy. 

Analogmagik may be a useful tool to understanding your system and system set up  for loading, gain etc, but ultimately you have to trust your ears. I don't see it as gospel, more an analysis tool to help understand your system. 

In this case @drbond has 2 arms and cartridges - so he can compare the behaviour of changing the parameters of each cartridge/phono set up - this is useful.

I would encourage him to try out the voltage gain option as well at some stage to get an understanding if voltage vs current mode for each of his cartridges. This will vary dependent on cartridge of course and can't be used for a generalised conclusion.

 

 

@dover 

Thanks for sharing your insight into the potential weaknesses of the analog software.  

I think the record that CH Precision offers for gain testing is essentially a small version of the Analog Magik software.  The Analog Magik software works by taking the output cables from the phono stage, and plugging that into a USB Phono Plus phono pre-amp circuit (which itself could have some limitations), which is connected to a computer running the Analog Magik software, while the Analog Magik test LP's are playing. 

In a couple of months, once my ears are used to the sound from the current settings on the CH Precision P1, I'll experiment with the voltage settings. 

Thanks again. 

 

Dear @drbond  :  " In a couple of months..." every one has his own " strategy " to make tests/comparisons.

For me 2+ months is non adequated because in that time our ears/brain will be accustom to that specific sound overall " colorations ". Rigth now you like what you listen to and I think is the rigth time to start to make the voltage vs current comparisons, doing it before our brain been a little or to much sticky with the current mode. Could be that maybe you will like more one of your cartridges with the current mode and the other with the voltage mode. Again, I think is the rigth time.

But as I said each one decides about.

 

R.

Take a view on  Tube Kronos Phono preamp

2 inputs, RIAA options full Tube Operation.

You can see it in my system, sounds superb.

So, it's been about 6 months since I bought the CH Precision P1/X1, and it has been a very good experience.  I haven't listened to any digital since I've had the P1/X1 installed, which is a good sign.  

The main distinction with this phono stage is that it does make me feel like I am at the venue, as opposed to making me feel like the performers are in the room with me.  I attribute the latter experience, of feeling like performers are in the room, to the "bloom" that comes with the tube sound.  I'll have to admit that occasionally, I do miss that "bloom" distortion, but I do get that experience if I switch out my Ypsilon PST-100 Mk2 SE pre-amplifier with the Lamm L2 pre-amplifier, which gives more of a tube sound.  But one day of the "bloom" is enough for me, and then I begin to tire of it, and want the natural sound of the Ypsilon / CH Precision P1 combination.  Overall, I the phono stage produces significant clarity and detail, without becoming sterile.  

An audiophile friend, who's been in vinyl for decades (and mostly enjoyed a SET set-up) visited recently and listened to the P1/X1.  He was impressed so much that he bought one for himself.  While I never tried the voltage mode on this phono stage, he did try it.  He said that the background sound / noise was worse via the voltage mode, as compared to the current mode.  He also said that the voltage mode had less defined imaging. 

Thanks to everyone who recommended looking into these current mode phono stages.  

 

@drbond , my experience with current mode phono stages pretty much mirrors yours. 

Whether or not you hear the venue or get the effect that the musician is in the room is more a function of the recording than anything else. What I find the distortion inherent in many tube designs does is blur the image, Outlines become less distinct. Remember, we have essentially the same speakers. 

 Not meaning to be combative, but referring to the capacity of a fine tube phono stage to “bloom” or to make the listener feel the musicians are in the room as “distortion “ seems a bit unfair, not to say unmeasured and therefore maybe not distortion. For one thing, creating those two sensations can have much to do with special qualities of individual recordings and with room acoustics. For another, I like those sensations. Ironically, Raul’s SS phonolinepreamp can do both. It’s superb in my estimation.

@lewm @mijostyn 

I listened to the exact same recordings with the only difference being the Lamm L2 versus the Ypsilon PST-100 Mk2 SE.  Running the signal through the Lamm L2 would cause my system to sound like the Manley Steelhead is back in as the phono stage, and cause a larger than life "bloom", which made me feel like the performers are in the room with me.  Running the signal of the same recording through the Ypsilon PST-100 Mk2 SE related a sense of being in the audience of the recording studio / concert hall, which sounded more natural.  

@drbond how do you like the Dohmann?

Drbond, I’d have to hear it myself to get a feel for what you’re describing. To begin with, for me bloom and the sense of ambiance are two different sensations. It makes sense to me that studio recordings where there is no audience and the recording engineer has greatest control really ought to give the listener the sense that musicians are in the room, or at least one is more likely to get that sensation under such circumstances. Club or live concert recordings ought to bring us to the venue, because the recording usually contains ambient cues. If my gear can achieve both illusions depending on the source material, I’m usually happy.

@lewm , in my mind, simple as it is, there is only one "right." Everything else is distortion. The "right" is what is in or on the recording. I admit that it is not always easy to determine exactly what "right" is. The most sensitive aspect of a recording is the image. I will go with whatever produces the most specific image. 

@drbond , again my experience mirrors yours. I prefer solid state in general. I am not familiar with Ypsilon equipment. We use the same tonearm and I have  a Lyra Atlas SL coming any day now (for 6 months). So, it seems we have very similar tastes. I have been waiting for Mark Dohmann to add vacuum clamping to the Helix. What are you driving the Soundlabs with?