Step Up Transformer

Dear @edgewear  : It's no surprice the mistracking you experienced with the 64S and low compliance Anna where its resonance frequency is not aquated and out of the " ideal " frequency range when in the 64FX it's spot on at the middle. The 4400 is almost a unipivoted design with some trouble with its bearing damping oil ranges and with its lateral balance too and not good couple for the Anna and I don't know which pipe arm you used with the 237. Btw, I don't know if you still use the RX-1550.

" The dry and lean character simply vanishes with a good SUT. "

,Well knowing Boulder that's more or less how was recorded those or " that " LP, the Ortofon character and the SUT gave you not better quality level cartridge signal performance but only added the colorations you like it even if those colorations are only added distortions.

R.

@rauliruegas you really know everything don’t you? I know you don’t like FR64S, so no surprise there. But I was very surprised as well as disappointed that Anna even mistracked in the MAX-237 (with J-shape armpipe), because that arm could handle everything or so I thought. I also know you don’t like SUT’s, but why do you think an active gain device wouldn’t add colorations of its own? The Boulder electronics were selected for their neutrality and that’s generally how they present music through the Maggies. With cartridges like Miyabi Standard, Transfiguration Proteus, Shelter Harmony or VdHul Colibri this delivers a sound that to my ears is very accurate, but also enchanting and immersive. With the Ortofons this set up emphasizes their own neutrality (a good thing in itself of course) to the point of being sterile, which keeps you uninvolved. Somehow a good SUT restores that balance. At least that’s the way I perceive things, but of course YMMV.

Rauliruegas, you make some good points. I heard the cadenza black in another system with a sut, so thought to give one a try. How does a SUT degrade the performance; what type of distortion or colour does it introduce.

It is a general consensus, that an Additional Pair of RCA Phono Connector Inputs are used, followed by quite a few metres of Copper Coil and Lead Outs, followed by RCA Connectors as Outputs and then an additional pair of Cables is to be used.

The same above stands for a Head Amp in use as well, but swap out the Copper Coil, for a circuit built with usually seen component types. 

The suggestion is, and mostly presented as a subjective evaluation based on the idea,  increased components in the signal path, deteriorates/adulterates the signal path, and the shortest signal path is working toward the ideal.

I have not seen any measured data, that clearly defines sound produced from a signal passing through a SUT or Head Amp' is an inferior Sound produced at the Speaker End.

Do keep in mind signal that is produced prior to passing through the Speakers Xover, is an electrical current. It is only when the electrical current/signal has travelled as far as the Speaker, is the time it becomes sound and is able to be evaluated by each individual. In most cases individuals do nit share identical attraction for the same produced sound. We are all unique and have sensitivities to how we are affected by sound. 

Dear @edgewear  : The issue is not about FR but what showed your Anna in those both FR tonearms that just said the FX truly was and is spot-on with.

The Anna is not only a " so so " tracker along those 16grs. on its weigth.

I owned the MAX 282 with all its 3 arm pipes and two but the J shapped 237 and I mounted there bad bad trackers to exceptionall trakers/ heavy ones and not so heavy and never had any single trouble with mistracking in any MM/MI/MC over 100 cartridges in cluding Ortofon but not the Anna. The gyroscopib MS tonearm bearing is really a beauty..

About the SUT issue it's not that I'm " against " it per sé and for several years I used SUT's , many to name it here including the best best SUT ever made exclusively to Denon by Murata : Denon AU-1000 that still I own and it's modified by me ( obviously not the transformers. ). Now a " few " years ago and even been owner of the AU-1000 a close friend of mine started and finished a " new " Phonolinepreamp that in those times outperformed in my system FM Acoustics.

We took around 2 years and a half to been finished and I still use in its version 3180, @lewm  own the 3160 version and other gentlemans the 3150.

Why took we the responsability to build that kind of unit?  easy: because no SUT/phono combination and top full SS active high gain units as the mentioned FMA truly even my way demanding analog targets till appeared the 3150. 

All versions came with two totally independent ( including power supply ) dual mono phono active high/low gain stages even time to time I use its MM stage along the AU-1000 and is enjoyable.

Btw, we are thinking to re-start that phonolinepreamp design maybe with 4-5 latest version including one for me. This is in the desk  because is not my business way of life and each unit time to build take a lot of time . We will see.

R.