Separate Phono Pre - $$ before I will hear a SIGNIFICANT difference vs. integrated?


In my search for a new Pre-Amp - one of the factors that I am considering is the "Line-Stage" vs. "Built-In Phono Stage" factor.

If I opt for a Line-Stage type - I will probably want to add a separate Phono Pre. I presently do like to spin some vinyl, but I only do it occasionally at the moment because I do not have a permanent place to place the TT. (I store it carefully when not in use)

TT = AR "The Turntable" with Straight (Jelco) Tonearm and Shure MX-V VMR Cart

Q1. How likely is it that something affordable (Like Schiit Mani around $130 USD or Mofi Studio?) will sound equal to or better than the phono stage of the NAD 7220PE Receiver that I am presently using?

Q2. How far up does one need to go in order to note a SIGNIFICANT step-up in Audio Performance?
(Maybe something with Balanced Outputs that is easy to locate CLOSE to the TT?)
geeqner

Showing 6 responses by elliottbnewcombjr

phono eq is very simple, standardized for all manufacturers since RIAA Industry Standard agreed to (right after or before most of us were born).

boost lows, cut highs, a simple known slope. absolutely nothing tricky, any quality manufacturer can do it integrated or separate, internal removes need for external cables.

separate takes more space, you are space limited. I would go with a modern integrated Amp/preamp with built in Moving Magnet input, and remote volume and remote balance (you can walk forward for power and input selection if needed.

Limiting space to one unit hopefully will allow you to leave your TT in position, carefully leveled first, then arm height/cartridge alignment refined and left in place.

Readily availavle, TT will sound infinitely better because you will use it more often. 
How big listening space, what volumes desired?

In your limited space, I would go for Solid State, and  enough but not too much power (reduced heat the goal, also keeps price down). 

That way, you have options to place integrated on a shelf, perhaps freeing space for the TT which would be my primary goal.
remote balance, not common, is a feature I find quite important, for some individual songs on CDs and/or LP, especially best of, compilations.

I make very slight tweaks left/right to specific songs, it is amazing how much everything (not just the primary artist) 'opens up', spacial cues, depth ... can be revealed.

I believe, in the context of either separate or integrated, my comments were 'true enough'.

wiki

Ultimately the New Orthophonic curve was disclosed in a publication by R. C. Moyer of RCA Victor in 1953.[6] He traced RCA Victor characteristics back to the Western Electric "rubber line" recorder in 1925 up to the early 1950s laying claim to long-held recording practices and reasons for major changes in the intervening years. The RCA Victor New Orthophonic curve was within the tolerances for the NAB/NARTB, Columbia LP, and AES curves. It eventually became the technical predecessor to the RIAA curve.

Between 1953 and 1956 (before the stereo LP in 1958) several standards bodies around the world adopted the same playback curve—identical to the RCA Victor New Orthophonic curve—which became standard throughout the national and international record markets.[7] However, although these standards were all identical, no universal name was used. One of the standard was called simply "RIAA", and it is likely that this name was eventually adopted because it was memorable.

It is possible that some niche record cutters were still using EQ curves other than the RIAA well into the 1970s. As a result, some audio manufacturers today produce Phono Equalizers with selectable EQ curves, including options for Columbia, Decca, CCIR, and TELDEC's Direct Metal Mastering.



OP

You would love the center control panel of the Fisher President II Console I inherited.

http://www.fisherconsoles.com/President%20II.html

In one drawer was a Garrard Record Changer, a couple of headshells, and a switch for Ceramic/Magnetic.

Other Drawer a Viking 75 Stereo Tape Deck. A switch for both types of tapes: Staggered or Stacked (In-Line). Staggered came first, a second mono head was added, about 1-1/4" away, upside down, for 2 track stereo tapes. In-Line was a single 2 track head like today.

It was made in 1958, Tape was Stereo, FM was not yet Stereo, LP went Stereo in 1958. Fisher came to my uncle's apartment and added a Multiplex Decoder on site for Armstrong's FM Stereo.

Selector Knob: AM; FM; Stereo Radio (Live Binaural Broadcasts); AES; RIAA; LP; NAB; 78; Tape; Stereo Tape

Radio had a brief Live Binaural Broadcast period, it was set up for that:
Selector: AM, tune it's AM tuner to NBC AM (live mic left side of stage). Selector: FM. Tune it's FM tuner to NBC FM (live mic right side of the stage) Selector: move to Stereo Radio. (I'm guessing which was left and which was right).

My current speakers are the horns, crossovers, and 15" woofers pulled from that console, in my new enclosure. Woofers re-coned twice, 1 set spare drivers downstairs.