Step Up Transformer

@dover thanks for taking the time to respond. I’m aware there is no ’best’, only better or worse interactions between cartridge, tonearm and amplification device, sometimes with surprising results when you least expect it. In order to draw any valid conclusions one would need to take a ’system’ approach and try out as many different combinations as possible, which is why I value your veteran expert opinion.

What you’re saying doesn’t really conflict with my own findings, based on my experiments with some 35 different MC cartridges, 5 different tonearms and 5 different phono amplification devices. This is of course a very limited ’universe’ compared to what’s out there, even if the number of different combinations to try within it is already vast. Some combinations work well as to be expected (based on specs), while others work much better or worse than expected. It seems in those ’best’ cases there’s some kind of electric handshake, perhaps similar to the best cartridge / tonearm combinations having an ideal mechanical interaction. And when both mechanical and electric synergy happen simultaniously, the results will most likely be outstanding.

Perhaps it would be worthwile if some of the more experienced folks like you would take the time to make their personal list of cartridge / tonearm / amplification combinations that really stand out from the crowd. If more people would mention the same combinations as being excellent, this could create some sort of experience based consensus about the ’best’ possible combinations as interacting systems, instead of the generally useless opinions about ’best’ components in isolation. Such a list might be useful to people who need help with their purchase decisions, which are the most frequent questions on this forum.

I don’t feel qualified to start this myself, but I would gladly contribute my own limited findings later on. So, anyone dare to go first?

Dear @lewm  : " will probably have wide bandwidth and low distortion. "

I'm sorry but from where came that statement?  That manufacturer never posted both specifications nowhere or exist measured information about.. 

 

R.

 

Dear @edgewear  : " If more people would mention the same combinations as being excellent, this could create some sort of experience based consensus about the ’best’ possible combinations as interacting systems, instead of the generally useless opinions about ’best’ components in isolation. Such a list might be useful to people who need help with their purchase decisions.  "

 

That could be fine but there are a lot of " things " around that scenario that those experiences are really good for only the gentleman that posted and owns that room system.

Things are thaT SAME COMBINATIONS WITH DIFFERENT SPEAKERS OR AMPLIFIERS OR CABLES OR ...OR....perform different too and depends too of the LP choosed tracks and obviously those experienced " ears " or know how of MUSIC level.

 

Look in this thread the OP owns the PS Audio Stellar phono stage and even that it's looking for a SUT ( no sense to me but I respect his " needs " )..Fremer was impresed for the Stellar unit and in his review he posted statements almost imposible to imagine for a so low price phono stage:

 

 " The midrange on this phono preamp is as open, uncongested, transparent, and revealing as that of any phono preamp I've heard at any price.

How's that for a "pull quote"? But it's true, not hyperbole, and I stand by it. In the midrange department, the Stellar Phono is the darTZeel of phono preamplifiers. Considering the price differential, that's saying a lot!  "

 

"" Because of its openness, transparency, and freedom from midband congestion, the Stellar did tell me some things I didn't already know, on many recordings. Small, subtle-though-significant things that surprised me. ""

 

""" 

At RMAF, I played the test pressing of the first movement of the upcoming Bruckner Symphony No.7 recording with Bernard Haitink conducting the Berlin Philharmonic, and the crowd sat through the entire movement, clearly enthralled (despite the noise outside the room) by the recording's insane transparency, three-dimensionality, textural delicacy, and airiness. The string sound is to die for, and the Stellar captured and unleashed all of it.

At home, using the Ortofon Anna Diamond cartridge on the SAT arm, the result was sensational  """

 

"""" I could cite a half-dozen more references to jazz, rock, chamber, and symphonic music I listened to through the Stellar Phono over the weeks I had it in the system, using it with the Continuum Caliburn turntable/SAT CF1-09 tonearm, the HW-40 turntable/Fatboy tonearm, and, at the very end, the Air Force One Premium/Graham Elite combo—all far beyond the Stellar's pay grade. But, rather than go through that list, I'll just reiterate and certify as true what Myers said in his manual note: "(The Stellar is) innately transparent and present(s) the music with a correct display of tonal balance." """   and he used too the Lyra Atlas SL.

 

Even all those and very good Atkinson unit measurements this thread is about SUT  ! ! 

 

R.

 

 

@dover stated "In terms of best, the problem is that there is no best, it so much depends on the cartridge/sut/phono combination."

This is one way to describe a overview based on experiences encountered.

It also is quite aligned to a how a Sales Person addresses a situation with a Customer. It is about Products and then the Best Product.

Another way to describe this, is that in many cases an individual has built a system that is accurately aligned to presenting in a manner that is aligned to their unique preferences for how a sonic is perceived.   

If the individual is to add to their system other ancillaries that can impact on the signal produced, and hence, the sonic produced. There is no best, there is only the item that has proved most satisfactory to suit their needs.

Very Very rarely is it seen that a individual with a obvious passion for audio, has the same equipment as another sharing a similar passion. Never would an individual with this leaning toward audio, build a system solely based on another's preferences. There is always the likelihood ancillaries used by others are able to become a curiosity and something to be experienced.

Dear @dover  : " Much more important than loading in my view is getting the gain structure right so you have the optimum voltage going into the phono.  "

I agree with that statement. My Denon AU-1000 hast a gain ratio 1:11.5 and I used with every kind of LOMC characteristics and works just fine.

Yes, a SUT has its own " colorations " because noting is perfect but the critical issue , other that its gain,  belongs to its really limited frequency range at both frequency ends against an active high gain stage. This objective characteristic speaks by it self of the real quality level in the SUT design. The today manufactures ( not all like Audio Tecchnica ) I think know that critical issue and normally they posted in their site NOTHING about and only the gain ratios but there is a way more critical issue and that's that the customers truly do not cares about and this is a true problem that goes in favor of the SUT manufacturers. I could  think that maybe you already measured the Altec 4629 FR .

 

R.

So I just took delivery of the new Revolver release, the one where AI was used to separate instruments from vocals. The difference between this 2022 release and the original is not subtle. I love it. I also realized after a few day of listening that I don’t need a SUT. my system sounds really fine. 

Thanks for all of your input and the discussions/debates.

😂😂😂😂

ps: I bought that LP recently and don’t care for it. To me it sounds too much like a CD. 

@fundsgon I have a what today would be classed as a obsolete technology that has been embedded in to recording, which is known as Q Sound.

Did it improve the Album, well no, did it enable a Recording Engineer plenty of scope to toy with the Stereo Soundstage and place some very unusual effects, well yes it did in spades.

I have Q Sound Recording that are my favourites of all owned recordings, not much can generate the experience Q Sound can. The Soundstage becomes huge, o is the Recording Engineer playing with the end user and creating the perception of a large spacious voluminous sound.

The enjoyment of audio is another avenue of entertainment, so why not make it entertaining beyond the normal methods encountered.

AI is capable and going to become even more capable because of the support it has generated.

What is certain is that both Q Sound enhancement and AI enhancement are not dependent on a SUT/Head Amp, Off Board Gain Module or Phon's costing £30ish K, to thoroughly enjoy what the recording is capable off.

Until next time, Enjoy your equipment. 

dover, your " dead silence " only means that you never took the FR measurement in the ALtec transformers. Nothing wrong with that.

 

R.

Pindac, by shear coincidence I just listened to Amused to Death, Quality Recordings pressing, and lo and behold it’s a QSound technology. And I must say it’s really really good. The soundstage is incredible.

Duck,

ps - digital, including CD, can sound as good or even much much better than vinyl.

@fundsgon , you are right. I listen to both analog and digital. There are good digital productions and there are bad. Just like there are good analog recording and there are bad. My criticism of the new Revolver lp is because it doesn’t sound like how it was originally produced. It sounds like a poorly produced digital recording to me. Overly hot, bright and harsh. I love the Beatles and have many old original lp’s and a few of the newer reissues. To me this new digitized analog pressing sounds like what it is. 

@fundsgon If that experience has captured you in Q Sound.

There is a Roger Water Live Album with Q Sound embedded. This is only available on CD, but has proved to be the most convincing of the 'being there' experience for Live Recordings at a Arena Venue I have listened too.