SUT - electrical theory and practical experience

Thanks o_holter. I believe your right I never got the settings right on the ASR. Didnt quite understand the loading/gain thing back then to be honest (still dont).
Finally got a new phono preamp though (schiit mani 2) and it was a great improvement using the AU340 SUT into the mani MM stage with 42 db gain. Everything kinda opened up and better punchy sound, better dynamics with zero noise/hum/buzz added. No coloration and that I also like a lot. 
I did try the Manis MC stage with 60db gain and 200ohm loading. Sounded nice but I no longer quite recognized the DL-103. The clean, dead silent, natural and organic sound Ive become used to with the SUT was gone. The Mani MC also picked up more vinyl noise (crackling etc etc) when compared to the AU-340 that seems to mask record imperfections really well. Maybe more engaging sound with the Mani, I think thats a matter of personal preference and the rest of the setup. This is really not a fair comparison at all (mani being very low budget) but it at least confirms my believe that you need to spend much more than 150 usd to beat a SUT.

Anyways, I asked myself before how much my ”new” receivers built in MM phono was holding the sound back? And how important is the MM stage when using a SUT? In my case it made huge difference even with a low budget preamp like the Mani. Know theres always room for improvement but this I can stick with for some time. 

Am soooo curious trying the Kenwood SH-305MC, anyone with experience?

My experience is that I can use a LOMC direct into the MM Stage, the Volume needs to be maximum, but the presentation to my description is very Rich and not as I like it.

I can also use a In-Built MC Stage and have lots of adjustment from the controls offered on a much liked MM/MC Phon'.

I can also use a SUT or Head Amp' on either of the Phon's in use.

I have found a SQ that really appeals, and can play around with it a little, the flexibility is also part of the attraction.

A SUT or Head Amp' is also a option on a SS Phon' with both MM/MC Inputs.

I have heard the MC Stage bettered or able to produce a SQ more to my liking on a SS Phon' with a SUT and Head Amp' used on the MM Input.  

Thanks for the link and the commentary. I guess the first step is to borrow one that is ballpark the “right” one (I think windings ratio is the spec) and see if it wows me. I did try the Allnic SUT into an EAR 868pl MM input but was underwhelmed. But that was one cartridge ago. Maybe that would just replicate the sound of the H-3000 anyway.

Adding the SUT that is most attractive to one's unique preference is more the discovery to be made than the adding the right SUT.

Matching the SUT to the Cart' is only one sector to be a consideration.

SUT's add a Coloration to a presentation, it is a case of how 'Rich in Tone' is ones threshold able to entertain before it becomes a repellant and how much of a compromise to the overall performance is the presence of Richness to have.

Lovely Deep Rich Tones are easily able to suppress Upper Mid' and High Frequencies and completely paste over the details in a recording. 

My preferred SUT's only add a hint of a Rich Tone and are not too far from the effects a Head Amp can have.

The Link has a Thread which is produced by an individual I trust, and have direct dialogue with via email on the subject of SUT's quite a few years past.

Not too long ago, I learnt that this individual favours the Ikeda Ist-201 as their 'go to' SUT, (this may have changed in recent times).

The Ikeda is able to be acquired for a similar price as the Luna, the Ikeda is also seen as a used item occasionally, so a few ££££'s can be saved. 

SUT's are a voyage of discovery, I wish you a safe journey.

Thanks Lew. Yes, there is a MM input. I wasn’t sure if the transformers in the Allnic were being used in the same role as a SUT plays. And yes, it is my understanding that Allnic hand builds the transformers and uses permalloy cores, which seem preferable to those with SUT experience/expertise.

I guess there is no harm in borrowing one to try but given that good SUTs are quite pricey (for a passive device), there would need to be a decent audible improvement for me to keep one in my system.

The H 3000 already uses built in step up transformers for moving coil cartridge levels of gain. If you want to use an external step up transformer, you would need to use moving magnet cartridge inputs on the H 3000. I don’t know whether the H 3000 even has MM inputs. If it does, that’s where you could go. You cannot hook up an external step up transformer to an internal step up transformer. Personally, I think you may be chasing your tail if you are even able to try this experiment with your H 3000, because the internal step up transformers on the H 3000 are already excellent.

Hi, I am looking for some real world advice. I recently purchased a new LOMC (Etsuro Urushi Cobalt Blue) that has an output of 0.25mv and 3 ohm internal impedance. I use an Allnic H-3000 phono preamp. An audio friend has the next step up (pun intended) of my cartridge with similar specs. Not sure what phono pre he uses. He swears by the SUT he’s using with it (Luna Cables Rouge):

My question is:

With the Allnic’s design, is it likely that I would achieve a significant improvement in sound quality if I were to add the right SUT (the Rouge may or may not be “right” for my cartridge specs)? I must say, the cartridge sounds great with the Allnic but only compared to the last cartridge I was using, a Kiseki Purple Heart, but maybe there’s a chance I’ve left something on the table?

rubandscrub - the cost effectivity is certainly an important aspect, like you write. I also have an ASR Mini Basis, now used mainly as a backup in case my main phono stage has problems. If your Denon carts have 0.2 - 0.3 mV output, I am not surprised that things improved with a SUT. More 'muscle', I imagine. Although I think the sound of the Mini Basis is quite good for the price, it is a bit 'polite', even with my 0.56 mV cartridge. The noise you heard may be due to stretching it, with the gain at or near max (I did not have this problem, using a medium setting).

Thought I share my perspective. In short, SUT’s are imo very cost effective and it easily gets forgotten. Some people have restrictions, for example room/placement and/or economical limits. Thats the case for me. 
Have Kenwood KD-990 (increased mass on tonearm) with Denon DL-103 for the past 25 years. Monitor audio speakers just as long. Standard gear all the way. 
Phono preamps have changed over the years though and also nowdays have a Denon DL-305. Started with cheapest Pro-ject stage and my last and to me most ”expensive” phono preamp was ASR Mini Basis. It was a nice sounding unit for sure, but there was constant noise from the speakers. Not too bad and didnt really notice it once the needle dropped but there was noise for sure. Decided to try a SUT instead, bought AU-340 and never looked back. I run the SUT to my Denon AVC-X8500 built in phono stage (I assume its crap!) still this is the best sound I had. Paid 350 USD for the AU-340, there is absolutely no way a phono preamp at that price would stand even the slightest chance against the SUT. So take this into consideration please. Also, maybe some people like fiddling around with dip switches and experimenting with loads etc etc, I did with my ASR but the whole thing just annoyed me at the end. 
I am about to buy a better MM phono preamp now. No silly money though, looking for something tops 500 USD. Any recomendations apreciated. 
Respect and thanks for a great forum that helped me a lot over the years.

Enough Raul.

Dear @drbond  : Yes, is more easy posted that way that give an answers that affect you because what I posted seems to me is true.

Ignore is your proble. Fine with me.

You have a huge problem that I posted in some of my posts: why with your CH are you asking so " deep " in a SUT other than buy one of same preamp manufacturer? This has no sense to me but obviously has a lot of sense to you that are not 100% satisfied with the CH. Maybe I'm wrong.

R.

Dave, I’m getting my Festivus pole out of storage now. I just aired my grievances with my wife. Then we’re going out for Chinese food.

@holmz 

But I’ll need to check the diagram to see if that built-in 1:4 SUT is loaded on the primary or secondary side

There are two possible loads that this SUT could have. The unintentional which is the typical 47kΩ input of a MM phono and the intentional which would be an additional filter on the secondary to "correct" any misbehavior of the device.   Both of these loads would be on the secondary of the device.  If there are specified cartridge loads for MC then is possible there could be an additional combination of primary and secondary loading and with the low turns ratio this is a possibility. 

I do think that the typical "dull" sound from loading a cartridge down too much is purely a function of the SUT behavior.  Since you have such a low ratio transformer an interesting experiment would be to find out the "calculated" reflected impedance and then try the following experiment.  (below I am assuming a 47kΩ load and a 40Ω Denon 103 and you can scale the values for different cartridge impedances.)

Assuming the 1:4 is terminated with 47kΩ  and a the cart should see 3kΩ as a load.  Now place a 1.6kΩ resistor across the secondary to reflect just under 100Ω to the cartridge and give it a listen.  Next remove the 1.6kΩ resistor and place a 100Ω resistor across the primary and listen again.  In a perfect world the load the cartridge sees will be the same (roughly 2.5X the internal impedance).  The gain of both situations will also be the same and my experiences tell me the sounds will be quite different.  To be clear... any differences heard will be a function of the SUT behavior and not the load the cartridge sees which puts this squarely in the purview of this discussion.

now that I am done with my airing of grievances it is on to the feats of strength.  Happy Festivus to all!

dave

As said in a previous post and one said with sincerity, as a result of my interaction with the analog forum.

" I wish you and all Forum Members in equal measure,  the very best for the Festive Season and hope for a Prosperous 2023 to be met. " 🥂

Am I the only one shaking my head?

No @antigrunge you are not.

Holmz, Make no mistake, Dave (Intact Audio) knows more about this subject by far than I ever will. So if my advice to check out the Jensen website seems counter to or only partially correct in view of Dave’s insight, go with what Dave says.

I am open to understanding, so anything many say is received including @intactaudio comments.

But I’ll need to check the diagram to see if that built-in 1:4 SUT is loaded on the primary or secondary side.

I don't believe I have expressed any negativity (or keeping it Seasonal 'Nativity' towards your endeavour 🎅🤶).

@pindac I may have seasonal naïveté 😀

I think that @pindac has the correct approach:  when children are misbehaving in order to get attention, it's best to ignore them; this approach is colloquially known as "don't feed the trolls" on the internet. 

Am I the only one shaking my head?

You have very short memory in purpose because you always want to win but this one. Even you don't remember your tale in Berlin with? Period., useless to derail this thread.

R.

that's what you wished but JC never came to support your tale. In that regards you are very bad looser, sorry.

Aside from the very obvious turnabout/contradiction from your prior post to me, just so you know, I've never asked JCarr to give me any support- I never felt any was needed and still don't. So how do you arrive at the 'looser' comment?? You already admitted I was right, confirmed what @intactaudio had also said.

So could you just lay off the trolling?? How about for the next shall we say, 3 days?? Have a good time over the weekend- seriously!

The following Bracketed Teext can be found on Page 4, it won't be difficult to see who posted it.

It looks like the references to the Sugden Model fell flat, and this has been the next arrows pulled from the quiver, as an attempt to collapse the Thread.

" trolling " especially demarcated. Passing the Buck 'isn't cricket old chap'. 

( Maybe just maybe drbond is just " trolling " in his latests posts. )

As said, a indicator of a collusion being in place to derail the Thread, seemingly a reignition of a previous slur and a attempt at accusing the OP of being disingenuous.

The OP has been present throughout the thread and shown appreciation of much that has been shared in support of their made inquiry. 

In relation to the Thread Title '   SUT - electrical theory and practical experience' drbond is the antithesis of a " troll ".

@atmasphere  , that's what you wished but JC never came to support your tale. In that regards you are very bad looser, sorry.

Peace.

R.

@antinn , yes often I have those kind of misunderstood and yes is my fault but not you or me losting nothing with the posts other tha your gentle time. Sorry for that.

R.

@rauliruegas,

You have taken what I said completely out of context.  What I was trying to say is that based on the two values you provided which was only the slew rate and the bandwidth, that by the equations the amp would become unstable at a specific voltage with one caveat (as addressed in the documents I linked) that designing the amp for peak voltage above that threshold maintains stability.  I also linked the Spectral specification where they specify all three values - slew rate, bandwidth and peak voltage.

So, I never stated that your preamp would be unstable above 1.5Mhz and now better appreciating how you interpret these items, should I ever conversate with you again, I will endeavor to be far more specific to prevent any misunderstanding. 

Peace on Earth and Good Will to All  

maybe I explained in wrong way: of course that as the theory says it happens, this is not under discussion and maybe as intact said you can open the fifth thread about till you can win.

😀 Apparently, I already did...

@atmasphere  , maybe I explained in wrong way: of course that as the theory says it happens, this is not under discussion and maybe as intact said you can open the fifth thread about till you can win. Just do it.

R.

I forgot @mijostyn  to post: @antinn  too:

" and at 1.5MHz, the amp becomes unstable. "

R.

Exist at least 4 long threads about in this forum, in all were very hot dialogues and that the end even that in theory exist the phenomenon that the cartridge cantilever could " suffer " of some kind of " stifness "  and even if happens Wynn proved in two of those thread with measurements in real time that the  effect in reality does not disturb the cartridge tracking levels and the one that really could " suffers " with that load/cartridge inductance and total nettwork capacitance is the bad phono stages designs but fortunatelly today not only Phono Stages have widebandwindth but high overload levels.

...And with that Raul has created a new branch of physics. That the cantilever is affected is a very real thing. If not- then we all could solve the world's energy problems by simply using enough phono cartridges 😂

@rauliruegas Before you implicate Mr Wyn with such a proposition, you better be sure that's what he really said! I think you'll find that he said something a bit more specific.

Dear @drbond  : ""  to be mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand, and mostly just arguing to support his perspective,....""

Is it that exactly what you already did it through all your thread and why a gentleman just from the very first page posted this?:

"" If I didn't know you were serious, I would suspect you of being a troll based on this sentence.  ""

and you following posting links trying to support " your perspective: don't you?

In the other side please show me 3-4 posts by me that were totally " irrelevant " and if you tell me then I can learn what or not do in the future. So I'm looking for your help. Thank's in advance.

R.

Dear  @atmasphere  : "  I am in disagreement with Mr. Der Veen on this topic.  "

Rothwell too and I learned that almost 20+25 years ago.

@intactaudio  : " I believe loading of a MC cartridge has a dramatic effect on the electromechanical behavior of the cartridge but that is a topic for another thread. "

Exist at least 4 long threads about in this forum, in all were very hot dialogues and that the end even that in theory exist the phenomenon that the cartridge cantilever could " suffer " of some kind of " stifness "  and even if happens Wynn proved in two of those thread with measurements in real time that the  effect in reality does not disturb the cartridge tracking levels and the one that really could " suffers " with that load/cartridge inductance and total nettwork capacitance is the bad phono stages designs but fortunatelly today not only Phono Stages have widebandwindth but high overload levels.

@mijostyn  could tell us something about because his phono stage has an over 3Mhz of bandwindth and high overload. Something as the phonolinepreamp in my system.

R.

I believe loading of a MC cartridge has a dramatic effect on the electromechanical behavior of the cartridge but that is a topic for another thread.

@intactaudio Yes! You and I are on the same page here.

@atmasphere   I would agree 100% with you if the only thing loading of a cartridge does is effect the LC resonance you laid out.  I believe loading of a MC cartridge has a dramatic effect on the electromechanical behavior of the cartridge but that is a topic for another thread.

dave

What is one to do when the two approaches listed above push you in opposite directions? Menno Van Der Veen acknowledged this and noted that after the proper secondary termination is determined, the load the cartridge sees can be further increased by placing resistance across the primary (ie to the cartridge directly).

@intactaudio I am in disagreement with Mr. Der Veen on this topic. My tests of LOMC cartridges has show that their inductance is so low that they simply do not ring at audio frequencies; they can pass a 10KHz squarewave quite nicely. This suggests that they are not in need of a 'load'. Thus the only load required is really at the output of the transformer, which will (as you point out) will need to be loaded differently depending on the cartridge used.

It is for this reason that Jensen has published a pdf of all the loading networks needed for all the cartridges known on their website. To my knowledge there are no loading values suggested for the primary side of the transformer. 

Of course it should be kept in mind that the tonearm interconnect cable and the interconnect on the secondary side be as low capacitance as possible for best results.

Holmz, Make no mistake, Dave (Intact Audio) knows more about this subject by far than I ever will. So if my advice to check out the Jensen website seems counter to or only partially correct in view of Dave's insight, go with what Dave says. 

@holmz I have seen how your investigation has evolved and how you are attempting to discover an information that is valuable to your requirements, and hopefully beneficial to your needs, there is no reason to suggest any different is expected, I have many enjoyable experiences spending time with others who have shown a similarity to this type of investigation.

I don't believe I have expressed any negativity (or keeping it Seasonal 'Nativity' towards your endeavour 🎅🤶). I do believe I referred to a experience of having been shown by an EE a Square Wave as a Signal on a Monitor and the shaping of the Signal was of importance, but at the same time, I made you aware I don't get too bogged down with such things.

Adding an extension of context to my comment. I am commissioning a Service and am glad the evidence is on offer for myself to witness, but I am trusting in the Service Selected to deliver the end product and seeing the EE Data is something of a EE's concern and not for me as a customer. From my perspective, with my limited experience, if I was on a DIY route to create a build, or seeking out a discovery, as you are, I am sure I will need to value the data shown in the Oscilloscopes Signal, and work out how to use it to my advantage.

There is no secret that you are being investigative in your route undertaken, and the average on-looker showing an interest will be wondering what will be your discoveries.

Unfortunately there are others as on-lookers associated with the duration of this thread, using your investigation as a means to continue their own agenda and find further ways to reinforce their viewpoint that a SUT is an inferior device to be used in conjunction with LOMC and MM Stage.  

The posts over the last few pages by those trying to derail the idea of selecting the  SUT to be used with a LOMC, are being met with very comprehensible countering and it is certainly a 'standout', that the Info' being touted at the present by the Parties attempting to derail the thread are Conjecture and Idea, not Theory with any element of a Substantiation and certainly not Theorem.

As said previously, nearly all read here has been liked, a small amount has been not so liked, and an even smaller amount certainly not liked.

To discover what is 'Likeable', Not So Likeable, Not Likeable, I do have to read the content. There is one help in deselecting posts that would be a waste of time to be read, and that is to use the Moniker at the head of each entry to see what id worthwhile avoiding. If only the Mod's would give a tool to block members posts getting into their account, how different an individuals personal preference for the structuring of a thread would manifest.

@holmz 

I am only trying to find a way to load the cart for my 1:4 SUT.

This seemingly simple statement is the basis for much of the confusion that exists around SUT's in general.  People feel the need to lump similar things together hence the discussion of transformer and cartridge loading in the same breadth.

This seemingly simple statement is the basis for much of the confusion that exists around SUT's in general.  People feel the need to lump similar things together, hence the discussion of transformer and cartridge loading in the same breadth.

From a cartridge loading perspective, people consider the transformer to be ideal, at which point a simple calculation nets a "nice clean" load for the cartridge.  The problem with this approach is that transformers are far from ideal and varying both the source and load values has a profound impact on both the measured and sonic behavior of the SUT.  This gave rise to the engineering approach as shown by Rothwell, Jensen et al focuses solely on the behavior of the transformer for a given situation.  The goal here is to set the source impedance to that of the cartridge and then adjust the secondary termination (load) to get the "best" response.  The problem here is this method provides a singular "load value" for a given cartridge impedance.

What is one to do when the two approaches listed above push you in opposite directions? Menno Van Der Veen acknowledged this and noted that after the proper secondary termination is determined, the load the cartridge sees can be further increased by placing resistance across the primary (ie to the cartridge directly).   Since this only lets the load be modified to a lower value, it is a step in the right direction (and the method I suggest for additional load) but does not represent the simple solution everyone craves.

When these two lines of analysis which use all the same terms are co-mingled in a discussion like this, people tend to form "technically correct" opinions which sit on a solid foundation of bad data.   

dave

Holmz, you ought to visit the Jensen Transformer website. There you will find erudite discussion with schematics and other data regarding how to load a SUT. Plus the engineers there are nice guys who might help with your specific questions, if you call them in California. 

n your most recent post, the last paragraph, is the area where this thread has caused a concern for myself, and the one that is the encouragement that has prompted me to avoid the evolving discussion. 

This attitude to avoid, is due to the fact the countering from differing parties to the developing discussion evolving, is already convincing enough to suggest the Thread is now on a route of Conjecture/Theory and the outcome will be as far from a Theorem as can possibly be. There is nothing seen to substantiate the avenue of investigation as having a end result that can be relied upon.

@pindac I am only trying to find a way to load the cart for my 1:4 SUT.
So that CBS square wave record may be helpful..or maybe not… I’ll find out.

But I do admit that I like to know what, say, a SUT is doing… like on a plot…
If it helps me to get it loaded right, then all is good. And if not then I will also know that.

In any case, I wish everyone on the thread from @drbond OP right through to your last post, a happy holiday season.
Felix Navidad

@drbond A well rounded assessment of your created thread to date, and I do agree the Rothwell Info' provided, has been very valuable entry, as well as, a very worthy point of reference to be found within this thread. It assisted with your own requests for further information and certainly will assist to others as well. 

I also feel @mulveling has offered a useful input to those showing interest, and looking to gather a understanding of the usage of the SUT as a Device. 

The Rothwell Info' certainly presents in a manner where the information is approachable by multiple individuals (where like yourself ) have a developing interest in the subject matter. I have also been pointed to this Rothwell Info' in the past, by a very adept EE who designs and builds. With this Info' on offer from Rothwell being suggested to be visited, I can only presume it has a content that lens itself to being accepted on this section of Electronics.

In your most recent post, the last paragraph, is the area where this thread has caused a concern for myself, and the one that is the encouragement that has prompted me to avoid the evolving discussion. 

This attitude to avoid, is due to the fact the countering from differing parties to the developing discussion evolving, is already convincing enough to suggest the Thread is now on a route of Conjecture/Theory and the outcome will be as far from a Theorem as can possibly be. There is nothing seen to substantiate the avenue of investigation as having a end result that can be relied upon.

I have no desire to see inaccuracies spewed out, that are already evolving into a topic that is quite confusing, especially to how the value of the extension of the subject will be beneficial to anybody if loaded with inaccuracies, as the counter presentations are highlighting. It does seem a contribution is supported by outsourced information, as means to help substantiate the meaning within the post. There is nothing being presented to stimulate a desire to learn more, as the endeavour is seemingly to come to nothing.  

Questionable content, is only going to achieve one outcome, which will be to taint a very good thread, especially one that in my view, serves as a reference point for the future to others.

Theorem, Theory, Conjecture, Ideas. I know which I am leaning toward as the foundation of the majority of posts in the last few pages of discussion in this thread.       

Well, my overall assessment is that there are several commenters who always have a positive contribution to just about every thread that they participate in:  @atmasphere ​​​​@antinn almost always have significantly positive contributions to every thread.  I think @pindac also has a thoughtful, philosophical insight into matters.  I also appreciate others' contributions to the educational aspect of SUT's, as @intactaudio has done.  

On the other extreme, @rauliruegas can occasionally have a positive contribution, but I find most of his posts to be mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand, and mostly just arguing to support his perspective, whether its relevant to the thread or not.  Optimistically, I attribute this to his lack of English comprehension.  Regardless, I wish him the best with his interests, and I hope he can learn to take constructive criticism, and contribute more positively in the future.  

I'm not following this thread too closely at present, because I thought that most of the practical aspects of SUT that I didn't understand was addressed in the links to the Rothwell Audio Products that one commenter ( @larryi ) posted early on, and one other user suggested to visit.  

The details of transient response of SUT's may ultimately prove to be interesting, as @holmz ​​​​@lewm may demonstrate, but at this time, I don't know if it will matter or not, but if those who know more than I do are persuaded that it is relevant, then I would be interested in seeing their hypothesis, methods, data, and conclusion.  

The style of a stupid is to say stupidities.

To each his own.

I’ll “step up” 😀 and wish you “happy holidays” as well.

@rauliruegas As you have kindly made a direct contact with myself, I have chosen to read the content of your post.

I usually avoid your posts, as I do not like what I read,  and when a Thread has a value to me, I copy and paste the valuable info, into a Draft Email. This method has been very useful and has been learned as a result of individuals like yourself bombarding a Thread with pointless crap.

From the off-set your attempts has been to knock the use of the Device being inquired about by the OP, where yourself and your cronies have even gone to the extent to derail the made inquiry and insult the OP as suggesting their intention for the thread was to act as a 'Troll'. This early attempt at manipulation of a Thread, and is my opinion the earliest entries to the content that is an attempt to,

" tell us what to post or not? " - Your Words not Mine

I am pleased as a "no one special" -'non ego centric' forum member, along with the multiple thousands you seem to have a similar disregard for, to be one, who has whilst visiting the analog section of Audiogon, have discovered a usable way to avoid having to be caught up in seeing the drivel from yourself and those that are in Cahoots with you. 

It is the Season to be Jolly and during this season there is a acceptance of the odd Preach.

As a Preach, as said before,

"I can easily forgive your outbursts, in the same manner I reserve for Friends, Family and especially my young Grandchildren, who are doing their best to find their way.

I can see your sickness to be recognised as a authority loud and clear, in the same way I see my Grandchild stand in front of a TV when not getting the attention they crave. It does seem this personality trait does manifest most noticeably during the Festive Period, it looks like this same trait comes to fore with @rauliruegas at this same period as well, along with all the others unashamedly displayed throughout the year.   

@rauliruegas I wish you and all Forum Members in equal measure,  the very best for the Festive Season and hope for a Prosperous 2023 to be met. Period.    

@pindac  : " 

The thread now is grounded with ones intention to attempt to impress their Mathematical Preference as being the better over another.

This attempt to hold centre stage, is being met by others, with a countering of this  very obvious intention at large, especially where the Math has been used as the support for the notion being proposed.

The Mass of Users of Devices as a Listener, do not care for such a Topic of Discussion. "

Who do you think are to came here and tell us what to post or not?, tghis is asother internet forums a free one to post what we want on the audio world.

So if you can go to other forums to preach. For me you are no one especial and only other audfiophile as thousands of thousands out there.

Your statements are TOTALLY wrong like it or not. If you don't like what you read here then just do not read it.Period.

R.

It looks like Bats are being catered for in the frequencies being presented and being a outcome of a Theorem presented.

@pindac The theory behind wide bandwidth in a zero feedback system has to do with filter theory. In a zero feedback system like a cartridge driving an SUT all the elements are passive so there is no correction.

To prevent phase shift (per filter theory) wide bandwidth is required.

Filter theory as it applies here:

Typically when a single frequency pole is present, it will induce a rolloff at 6dB per octave. Phase shift components of a 6dB slope will be induced down to 1/10th the cutoff frequency (the latter being defined as the -3dB point). That is why you see such wide bandwidths promoted in transformers, which typically have no feedback correction.

(As you may have surmised, if there is feedback correction the need for such wide bandwidth is reduced.)

So an SUT that cuts off at 50KHz will have some phase shift down to about 5KHz. The ear perceives phase shift over a range of frequencies although it cannot perceive it at any one frequency. Over a range of 5KHz to 20KHz where phase shift is induced by a 6dB/ocatve rolloff at 50KHz, the ear will perceive this as a ’darkness’ or ’slowness’; IOW a tonality is assigned. Conversely if there is an zero introduced at 50KHz rather than a pole, the ear will perceive this as a ’brightness’. So to maintain a neutral presentation, the bandwidth is important.

Dear @holmz ​@lewm ​@intactaudio : My Denon AU-1000 just arrived from its measurements I ask and what I receive of information is that this exxtremely special custom made for Denon Murata SUT transformers has a bandwindth ( my hard silver wired . ): - 1.35db at 3hz ( FR is the champ in tihis frequency range ) and totally flat to -2.5db at 305khz. It's THD 0.001 and noise levels -105db. I understand that the Murata is c0oper wired but superior to the silver Knondo and Ortofon silver wired too.. For me is really good this Denon. Unfortunatelly I did not ask for its rise time.

I own other Murata SUT’s as Entré and Denon AU-340 and even that the Entré transformers looks similar to the AU-340 exist a tiny differences in favor of the Denon, both transformers hard wired with same kind of cable.

Lewm as I told you , the AU-1000 is really near the direct connection to the MC in my phonolinepreamp and this speaks a lot of its quality performance levels.

R.

Dear @holmz ​@lewm  : Good say it. Even almost all the OP links where full of science/math because as holmz and the op wanted is to UNSERSTAND it how it works and from where could comes or not the advantages.

R.

Dear @antinn  : The figures in the phonolinepreamp in my system was measured.

"   the amp becomes unstable. "

Not the one I own that was designed by a " genius ", not that really is a genius but his knowledge levels are at least at the same of any one of you and even could be higher than you can imagine. This is not bla, bla.

R.

Some of us find the science of these devices to be interesting per se.  Some others do not.  Based on his posts to start the thread and subsequently, I judge that the OP is one of those interested in the science. If he thinks the thread has drifted away from his intended question (which it has once or twice), he can say so here. If you prefer the subjective experience of "listening" as the sole means of selecting the elements of your audio system, I respect that.  I prefer a mixture of both, but anyone who is turned off by the technical language can simply stop reading.  Argumentative sidebars about whether SUTs are good or evil are beside the point of the thread; I agree. I do not nor have I ever owned a SUT nor heard one in my system, yet I do find the subject interesting, and I am open-minded as to the potential virtues, because of the testimony of so many others who do use SUTs.

Pindac, What "theorem" are you referring to?  Thanks.

I do agree, it is for the OP to steer a thread, if the content of it is developing into a discussion beyond their needs and seen to be best kept as a separate topic.

The Topic makes a lot of sense when maintained in a area where the Science in use has a Audible to the Human Ear function.

It looks like Bats are being catered for in the frequencies being presented and being a outcome of a Theorem presented.

This Thread is now about Theorem and whether one version is able to be proven superior to another, even thought the condition under discussion may not even be audible to the Human Ear, and certainly most unlikely to be audible to the individuals Spoiling the Thread with the attempts to maintain the Math as the important area of discussion.   

If I was a visitor to this thread, my first thoughts would be to question the understanding of the Theorem being presented by those who are enforcing the subject to the forefront.

I don't trust many views presented on Math, as there are those that can read it and comment on it, as their interpretation, and there are those that produce the Math. The producers of Math that has become Theorem, are quite a different being to a interpreter of a produced Math.