SUT help

There is a pursuit for Transparency, I am familiar with that very pursuit, and got off the Bus, where I found the levels I like.

My selections of SUT and Head Amp' are tools that enable my selected levels of Tolerable Transparency to not be noticeably encroached upon.                                   For myself both perceptions locked onto, a very loose, slow to decay Bass, as well as the Perception of Crystalline Transparency are Detractors in equal measure.

It is also an interesting point, that the few individuals I know that created what I will refer to as a s Crystalline Transparency, spent quite a period of time attempting to discover a Rich Tone that could be added that was tolerable to themselves, enabling the periods of listening to be accepted for longer periods.

The individual on their pursuit for Transparency/Richness have to find their own unique place to get of the Bus when it comes to end sound being produced,

Too much Transparency can be well Too much Transparency, this is not a Goal in how a Audio End Sound is to be presented, it is a Idealism, a Fantastical Place.

Only a few promote the idea of Transparency, each individual should decide on their own interpretation through listening and deciding what is now  'Too much Transparency'

As Transparency is broadly described as a condition where unwanted residuals are processed and removed, as an attempt to keep the system as pure as possible.      The image might help with a visualisation of what can be classed by some as needing 'Further Transparency' maybe the Grey Connector is too much colour to be able to visualise for a few. Another Group, will view this Clarity as 'Too much Transparency' , maybe a little more opaqueness to the material will be welcomed, or the addition of a translucent veil might suffice, maybe some might not want to visualise it at all, and put something in place to screen it off.

 

 

 

  

 

      

Different SUTs apparently can sound different from one another, even when they are the same with respect to turns ratio (i.e., the amount of voltage gain added).  This can be due to the nature of the core material (the transformer wire is wound around a core; there are many different choices for core material, and I am not equipped to discuss them), the nature of the wire used (purity of copper or silver or silver plated copper), the input and output jacks per se, and the interconnects that must be added into the signal path in order to install a SUT.  If you think that's a virtue or that you can make it a virtue, go for it. I am sure a transformer manufacturer can list still more factors that affect SQ.

In my first post on this Thread I make known my perceptions of experiencing broad variety of different SUT's from Brands and Tranx Suppliers. I also add my perceptions of Head Amp's experienced as well.

Various Perceptions of Tonal Richness can easily be described variety of flavours or seasoning.

What I did not make known is that I can create a perception of immense Tonal Richness by using the MM Input on my Valve Input / Output Phon'. It is not in anyway preferred, but is as Tonal Rich as I would ever go near as an experience to be had.

I have experienced SUT's that can create a perception of TR that has surpassed the direct into the MM Input I can endure for short periods.

SUT's need to be experienced, to discover where ones TR tolerances are to be pressed on or where there is a TR that can be embraced and wanted to be maintained. 

@vacountryboy Since he didn't go into detail at all regarding winding ratios, I wonder if the different 'flavors' he could be referring to may simply just be a difference in gain between the different models - though the perceived difference between the two Audio Note models is interesting as they have the same ratios I believe.

Ultimately what I've gathered from this thread is just that there's no definitive answer here and ends up coming down to individual preference based on how things sound in your home and system. I'm going to try to poke some friends of mine to see if they have any models I could demo in my system just to play around with different things before I make any buying decision.

Thanks for weighing in @pindac and @lewm. What intrigued me about the video was the discussion about SUTs providing different flavors which could be interchanged either by swapping the transformers (in the one case) or changing the loading and impedance in the case of the Andros Allasso. I was intrigued by Guttenberg's suggestions for accommodating different carts and, in the case of the Allasso, making on-the-fly adjustments. What are your thoughts on these two different SUT applications?  

I watched the video. The SPU 1 cartridge puts out 0.18mV, by a very liberal criterion of 5mV/cm stylus velocity. The JC3+ affords 64db total gain on MC. Could be that the amplified output of the JC3+ is not quite enough to get the most out of the downstream sound system. (The signal voltage output would be about 0.27V, not by itself enough to get the most out of most amplifiers.) Could be the JC3+ has an inherent lean sound on MC settings. Could be his ears. Anyway, for sure a SUT is an option.

I have not watched the Youytube Clip, the Title itself 'Best Sound' is a detractor immediately. I have run out of Steam, when it comes to being exposed to such individualist assessments. 

A Phon' used as a MC Input only or MM Input connected to a SUT or Head Amp, is a matter of choice to experience and a matter of choice if it is to be maintained.

The choices made are not ubiquitous and the Math for the choices that can be made will take one to one option type if the quietest of output is the desired goal.

I have as of yet, in relation to listening experiences, not been convinced that a MC Input on an Phon' is the option to be maintained by myself, over other options. 

 

I have been following this thread with much interest as I too wonder if adding a SUT or other pre-phono stage device might improve the "realness" of the sound coming from my Whest 40RDT fed by a Benz Gullwing on a Basis 2000 table with a Rega RB900 arm or coming from an Electrocampaniet ECP 1 with a Hana ML or AT33Mono on a Technics 1200G (and other carts not yet tried). The discussion here has not yet resolved (for me) into a decision either way. Of course, I realize that trial-and-error governed by one’s own ears in one’s own room is usually the most recommended approach on these inspiring and insightful forums.

Nevertheless, not meaning to rattle a hornet’s nest, I was wondering what the much more expert audiophiles here might think of the Audiophiliac’s recent evaluation of three SUT solutions:

@bobsdevices Thanks!

We occasionally run into customers who can't abide any phono noise despite the phono section being quieter (so inaudible) then the LP surfaces themselves. That kind of individual seems to value the noise floor over other characteristics. For them, SUTs are useful even though the phono section works quite well down to 0.2mV. So I think this is a different application than what you are describing- we found that the least amount of step up resulted in a more spacious soundstage, stuff like that. If the phono section has less gain this result might be quite different!

@atmasphere I was referring to your comment about using the least gain from the SUT the better.  That has not been my experience.  By the way, I am still using your line stage and love it.

@bobsdevices Our phono sections are designed to work with LOMC cartridges directly.

It seems where SUTs are best suited is if the phono section is designed for high output MM cartridges. That's always been their traditional use.

Re atmasphere:  Key is the noise floor of the phono stage.  I have found that using a SKY SUT to bring the input to the phono stage at about 7mV works best to my ears in most cases.  Of course it depends on the quality of the phono stage.

From answers to my original questions, it seems like finding a SUT with 1:10 and 1:20 options might be best since it sounds like there's been success with both and either should work with various configurations on my phono pre-amp.

@mmcgill829 We have used SUTs in our preamps (I prefer direct FWIW) but one thing we noticed was the less gain you try to get from the SUT the better. So if it does have reconfigurable stepup (like the Jensen JT-346, which is an excellent SUT, one of the best), use the least amount that will get you enough gain. Its Ok if you have to run the volume up on your line stage a bit; as long as the noise floor of the phono section overall is less than that of the silent grooves of a good quality LP, you're good to go. IOW 1:10 is better than 1:20.

@lewm I do not own a Paradise at the present or any other time.

I have described how I have experienced the Paradise as a SS Circuit as a few build guises. 

I also made it known that an alternative SS Phon' is also known to me that is one I am very impressed by.

I am without a Vinyl Source, it is packed away ready for storage. 

I have a few intersting experiences to be had around Vinyl Replays in the future.

I am having most of the Musical experiences in the homes of others. 

For myself, being social around my hobby  is more important than the  music replays and much much more important than equipment. 

@bobsdevices , I have an Hana ML. which one of your products do you recommend? Even older models would be fine.

I also have the Mod Wright 9.0.

Pindac,  I know nothing about your phono stage and certainly never said or even implied that it was inferior. Originally, I was merely asking about how the term "Transconduction" might apply to the mystery phono stage that you like. The way you used the term, it seemed you were suggesting it is a category of phono stage opposite to a "Transimpedance" or current driven phono stage. To me, the alternative to current drive is voltage drive, and there is no need to adopt the term transconductance because in fact all audio gain devices act through transconduction.  Then you revealed finally that your phono stage at least starts life as a Paradise phono, made on a custom basis in the UK, so far as I can tell.  I read something about it and commented that it received a lot of favorable mention on the internet, and that it appears to use an FET and a tube complement that are both reminiscent of the Herron phono stage that is much liked on this side of the pond. Please show me where I criticized the Paradise phono, on any basis at all, let alone its relatively low cost. I also never in any way said that cost is directly proportional to results in audio.  It most certainly is not.

@mmcgill829 The very best method to make a discovery about a impact a device can have is to experience it with an open mind.

You are on the right track with Winding Ratio's selected.

The want to experience will be furthered as an educational encounter when a SUT is used in your system.

Your assessment of your experience, as well as the impression that is made on you, is awaited by myself.

There is plenty of info in this thread and linked threads to help you get a bearing on what has been experienced. 

I am happy to have supplied a description that will be a aid to this. 

 

Okay so maybe time to get back on the rails here...

What exactly is the point here?

None of this is doing any service to my original question, and seems more to be a debate about who is 'right.' The theoretical gear needed (or not needed) to 'prove' or 'disprove' anything is a pointless discussion. Everyone has different gear, rooms, ears, preferences, and opinions. It's also completely irrelevant to my question.

I fully appreciate that there are varying experiences here with SUTs, with some finding some pleasing improvement to their experience, and others not. All are valid experiences.

From answers to my original questions, it seems like finding a SUT with 1:10 and 1:20 options might be best since it sounds like there's been success with both and either should work with various configurations on my phono pre-amp. Some good suggestions on specific models to consider so far, but if anyone else has any other suggestions that might fit the bill, happy to check them out as well. Thank you to all who have provided some guidance on proper matching.

@atmasphere You Stated:

"the most expensive gear might not be the best sounding."

Might !!, Is very broad in its context used.

I will say when I eventually / If I eventually get to experience the end sound produced by the most expensive equipment. There might be a sound discovered that shows it to be extremely desirable to keep in use, maybe more attractive a sound than any other encountered. Obviously affordability will be the realised  constraint to making an acquisition materialise.

I don't see too much difference between either of our Statements, they are both Conjecture. 

I suspect that any body with a interest in experiencing something that is off real interest to them, is with a underlying wish to experience the very best of what is available.

Gastronomes will quite happy put their name on a waiting list to be given a seat in a restaurant of choice with a year for the waiting.

A Photography Enthusiast, will usually make sacrifices to get to the place of having professional quality Glass in their arsenal of lenses.

Vintage Car Enthusiasts will Travel far and wide to see the most pristine models from their chosen era of production.

Vehicle Enthusiasts, with little interest in owning a Performance Car will pay to experience Track Days in Super Car with Professional Driver and Coach, just to know what it is all about, a Performance Car Enthusiast, I presume the Goal is to keep going to the day out is in a Formula One Vehicle?

As for Audio Equipment, there are many who are enthusiasts, that would like the experience of being seated in front of an Uber Expensive Set Up.

I myself have done this on occasions to the point I class myself as Familiar with an extremely expensive Audio System. Even though extremely impressive and always thoroughly enjoyed when experienced, I do not class this as the Very Best in Audio, neither is it the very best produced sound that I have encountered.

My own take is attraction to end sound is unique to each individual, so each has their very own preference for what they want to wed themselves to.

My inquiry was relating to what would need to be the supporting equipment to prove a particular device selected for Audio purposes is the Best of the Offerings.

If I made the Statement I have heard the best end sound from any of the Phon's I have heard in use, hence I believe this Phon' to be the best Phon' ever produced.  I'm sure my statement would be questioned quite heavily.

The heavily questioning may be quite less, if such a statement is backed up with the types of supporting equipment used, the description offered will hopefully be one that can be seen to be with increased creditability, if references to equipment used are seen as cutting edge and at the forefront of design and function.

But most importantly, all the context of the above is conjecture, the experiencing and impression being made is the only way to assess how an end sound is one to be lived with or not.

@lewm seemingly decided he knew the quality of the end sound of my owned Phon's and suggested my owned and in use Phon's, were inferior in producing sound to others.

My Bespoke Built Phon' was over a period of time carefully worked with, to Voice it to my own particular preference. When the Phon' got to the end sound I was most attracted to. The designer / builder, made it known, my version was to be the upgrade option. I know I have got exactly what I want to make Old Bones with.

I also know Customers for this same Phon' design are extremely pleased with having discovered this as an option.

   

       

  

Help me out please, when the Phon' of Phon's does become available for my experiencing. How do I capitalise on this opportunity.

Must the TA be the £60K Sat. 

Must the LOMC be over £20K

Must the TT be north of £80Kish

Must the Interconnects be £20K+

What must the Downstream equate to £250Kish.

@pindac High end audio isn't driven by price, its driven by intention. For that reason, the most expensive gear might not be the best sounding. Its simply the most expensive.

Funny how when I express an opinion on how I perceive what might be the best conditions to assess the Mother of all Phon's, the reply is that it is utter rubbish.

If I had to guess, the reason was because @lewm is possibly aware that price and sound quality have nothing to do with each other or at best are only loosely associated.

@lewm  Has this not been where the Thread Started,

Has not all Posts been close to describing what one is doing as their very unique methodology to experience a particular type of Cartridge and nothing else.

Have you not yourself stated the following:

 "The answer to Raul's OP question seems to be no, nobody knows which cartridge type is inherently "better".  But most of us have an opinion."

Funny how when I express an opinion on how I perceive what might be the best conditions to assess the Mother of all Phon's, the reply is that it is utter rubbish.

A Pole might suggest my hypothetical list is one that a proportion of others seem to think would be attractive is able to be achieved.

But!, If they Don't, at least the assessment of the Threads Theme and Contribution has bee maintained, where most of us have an opinion . 

Pindac, what a pile of rubbish!

The jensen isomax sut is a nice one. The 1/10 version will work well with the hana's. I use it with both my hana el and denon dl103. Tavish design uses Jensen transformers in their adagio.

@lewm I don't think I have heard the very best of anything the commercial world can put out as an Audio Device, especially Phonostage. Who has in this thread? 

In my limitation to nearly all Audio Experiences being UK Bound, I do think I have experienced in known systems, a very good Commercial Offering in Phon's upto £15K.

At Events I have heard commercial offered Phon's that far exceed the £15K.

I have been very familiar with Commission Built Phon's upto £8K where bespoke parts are produced for the design. 

I have heard DIY Built Phon's  where the BOM is close to  £2.5K

I am very familiar with an extensive range of Phon's and shortlisted only a few, and also had one commission built to meet my own needs.

Help me out please, when the Phon' of Phon's does become available for my experiencing. How do I capitalise on this opportunity.

Must the TA be the £60K Sat. 

Must the LOMC be over £20K

Must the TT be north of £80Kish

Must the Interconnects be £20K+

What must the Downstream equate to £250Kish.

Would I be wrong to try out a SUT or Head when such a Audio Set Up is assembled. 

I don't want the 'so called' best, I'm happy with the cut of ribs or offal. 

But what I really want, is simply something that makes the idea of it sticking around attractive. I have got this in many owned items to be used for Audio and Music Replay purposes. 

It is important the OP knows this and those looking in without comment made. 

@tomic601 That is quite true!

I am not of the camp that aspires to absolute purity above all else. Somewhere in the middle is where I like to land, so I’m not quite as concerned about being ’distortion free.’ I mean, most of my gear is tube gear in some capacity...

All that being said, I don’t think there is a right or wrong approach here. Just depends on what sounds good to our ears in our own systems.

I do appreciate hearing lots of different perspectives, however, and it’s given me plenty of things to consider in addition to the answer to my actual original question.

EDIT: also, thank you very much for the compliment!

To the OP..no worries…. beehive is where the honey is.

Somebody said pick the distortions you like… i add nothing ( so far )  is free ….

I have in one system a highly modified vintage tube amp w what i consider to be some of the best output transformers ever made….so i’m not as pure as the driven snow….

Have fun…i looked at your system photos…lovey curated gestalt….

Pindac, I have no doubt that what you say is a true summation of your personal experience. I can only suggest that maybe you haven’t sampled some of the very best high gain phono stages. This is not to say that I would argue the superiority of any single approach to amplifying LOMC cartridges. Also, I might point out that a “head amp” either voltage driven or current driven is naught but an outboard gain stage that mimics the gain characteristics of a good high gain MC stage, which puts everything in one circuit without the necessity for a separate chassis and an added pair of ICs.

I am not seeking a route away from a SUT. 

My assessments to date have kept me close to them as a device to be used with a LOMC.

Most recently the very analytical assessing has been carried out on same support > same Plinth > same TT >same TA+Heads he'll, with same and similar Cart's from the same Brand.

Experiences are had with SS, Valve Hybrid, Valve Input/Valve Output, SUT's, or Head Amp. 

One  SS MC Input/ MM Input Phon used, is one I am seriously considering owning. I Struggle to see where there is wrong, as I can contentedly  listen to a MC Input without any concern, on the Phon's used, The end sound is fine and living with it for an extended period, is a welcome experience. 

Put a particular design for an SUT or Head Amp into the 0 and I find it hard to wish for anything different. 

I have from an audible experience no issue with the recent description a distortion is introduced, of which to a certain individual is an attraction. 

From an audible experience based on my ability to detect information extracted from the Groove, the options I have around me to use as  Phonostages are all seemingly with a Parity for being Spacious and Detailed.

I would say the SUT has the edge on creating the perception of being Involving and wanted to be maintained in use. 

My Perceptions of how an analytical period of listening impacts om me as an individual with unique preferences for an end sound. 

@lewm Yes, I was just pointing to a reason why SUTs tend to be less spacious, detailed and involving even when properly loaded as compared to when you are able to run direct-in.

Elliot, The phono stages in both of my phonolinepreamps have sufficient gain to handle any LOMC cartridge. I am going to generalize and say they both produce a total gain (including linestage gain) of more than 75db, probably more like 80db. They are both fully balanced designs. (One is my modified Atma-sphere MP1; the other is Raul’s 3160 Phonolinepreamp which can be configured for either of two levels of MC gain.) No MM stage is involved. 80db applied to the MC2000 output is enough gain to drive my Atma-sphere amplifiers with room to spare, and the amplifiers drive Sound Lab 845PX speakers which I have modified to make much more efficient than stock. To the OP: I have no beef with SUTs. I have heard SUTs do a fantastic job paired with an excellent MM stage. I just chose not to go that route. I can’t even give you a good reason why, except maybe I am a cheapskate.

I've experimented with "transimpedance" stages, and I prefer the above two preamplifiers to what I have heard in my system.  Let's call them "current driven", not transimpedance, because the latter term implies that impedances make no difference. They do, or it does make a difference.

Seems I poked the beehive with this topic 😅.

I appreciate all the varying perspectives here. Has given me things to consider.

Using low impedance MC carts, I would highly recommend looking into a Sutherland Engineering SUTZ. Which is a step up transimpedance unit made to replace the internal solutions of your favorite phono preamps. Just put this between the cartridge and MM input, exactly like you would incorporate a step up transformer. I have improved a number of tube phono preamps, to include Allnic H-7000 (with silver step ups), Manley Steelhead, and most recently an Allnic H10000. A truly incredible device with a 2 fold benefit. Add transimpedance to the system and improve transparency over any step up transformer I have tried to date.

lewm

how is the .05mv increased to MM signal strength?

Active Gain, signal not stepped up?

Ralph, You should know by now that in my case you are preaching to the converted. I do not now own a SUT. Nor have I ever owned one. Furthermore, except for one amplifier I built myself from scratch for the fun of it and because I came into a pair of fine vintage output transformers, I have never used a transformer coupled tube amplifier. But all that is part of a personal belief system that I keep to myself (except for now), and I would not foist it on anyone else who likes to use a SUT.

I also now have two very fine phonolinepreamps (to use Raul's parlance), one basically tube and one all SS, both of which have sufficient active gain for any MC on the planet, which is to say the Ortofon MC2000 at 0.05mV output can be accommodated by both with no intercurrent audible noise.

Thx Ralph… hence my play on words….

@elliottbnewcombjr @lewm @mmcgill829 Here is something you all might want to consider. Audio transformers of all types make distortion. If they are not loaded properly they will make more distortion but you can never make them distortion-free no matter how well they are matched to the system in which they are used.

This is because of something called the 'hysterisis curve'. With a simple sine wave the distortion can be fairly low, but since the curve runs through all 4 quadrants, when the signal is more complex the distortion will be far more complex as well, meaning you get more than just a simple 2nd harmonic!

Its unavoidable if you use a transformer.

Put another way, if you don't want to color the sound, if you want to hear the music with the least amount of distortion, avoiding a transformer at the input to the audio chain is probably a good idea (if you have enough gain otherwise); there is no way to reduce that distortion downstream as it compounds from stage to stage.

You can debate the 'sound' of the transformers all you want but that 'sound' you hear is in fact the distortion of that transformer. If you like the sound of a certain transformer that's fine; its good to know that distortion is why and that it may not be so benign as signal level increases. Distortion obscures detail in addition to modifying the harmonic structure of musical instruments. So if you want the most out of your analog investment dollars, this is something to consider.

Just as the OP said, SUT discussions are like drunken sailors, but remember, they get where they are going, usually.

lewm

not quite, I can compare MM with or without the SUT, I can only hear LOMC via the SUT.

""My different MM Cartridges, their differences similarly heard passed thru SUT or direct to mx110z’s MM Phono as above.

MC, the story is the same when listening to mine or friends (who are familiar with my system’s sound), theirs’s sound ’essentially’ like they are used to, the sound they preferred, not any noticeable alteration."

....................................

LOMC, I don’t know what my LOMC AT33PTG/II sounds like except the combo of FR SUT and McIntosh mx110z Phono RIAA EQ. Same for my AT33PTG/II LOMC Mono cartridge. My confidence that the SUT is not altering the Cartridge’s sound is from playing several of my friend’s LOMC cartridges here.

theirs’s sound ’essentially’ like they are used to the sound they preferred, not any noticeable alteration."

...............................

Get thee a tonearm with removable headshell, get thee some friends, get thee a true Mono Cartridge, get thee two tonearms, alternate ready to go!

I noticed, the ModWright has a rear switch: Stereo or Mono, which I suppose is like a Stereo/Mono switch on a preamp with that feature. It’s a feature loaded Phono Stage, I’d like to hear it here!!!!!!!!

interesting theory…. this straight wire transformer…… i shall notify all those transformer engineers they have been doing it wrong all these many years…. except for @atmasphere …who for some crazy reason has worked very hard building amplifiers that….. ahem…. eliminate these perfectly transparent components…..

If you think this hysterical…. just alter the spelling…. slighlty….

@czarivey Sure, and I could probably get a bigger improvement by replacing all of my gear entirely with different, more expensive things, but that's not really the point of this thread. 😂 I'm just curious about SUT options is all, and like Bill touched on in his comment - add 'another tool to the toolbox.' If I try a few and can perceive absolutely no difference, then that'll be the end of that.

There are in fact pre-phono preamps that do job of SUT a lot better and even worth a lot cheaper. dint ya kno that???

@bobsdevices the man himself! Thank's for your insight.

Elliot, So, to boil down what you wrote, your FR SUT used with an LOMC cartridge, has no effect on the overall SQ of your MX110 used straight in with an MM cartridge, even taking into account that the two cartridges themselves are different from one another in SQ, like tonal balance, bass accuracy, etc.  Would that be a fair summary of what you wrote above?  Because I am on your side; a SUT, like any other component of an audio system, ought to be as neutral as possible (even though nothing is neutral except subjectively).

pindac

nope, nope, nope ...... nope.

Passive, Straight Wire With Gain, ZERO noise: that’s what my Fidelity FRT-4 SUT is.

MM Passed Thru it to my mx110z or MM straight to my mx110z’s MM Phono sound the same. I love the sound of my mx110z’s MM Phono RIAA and would not want it’s sound altered by anything, just a different cartridge to evaluate, hear the cartridge’s differences: ’preferred, not better’.

Disliked my McIntosh C28's Phono, Liked my Fisher 500C and 800C. Liked my Tandberg TR80; Like my Yamaha Receiver's MM Phono. RIAA differences. 

My different MM Cartridges, their differences similarly heard passed thru SUT or direct to mx110z’s MM Phono as above.

MC, the story is the same when listening to mine or friends (who are familiar with my system’s sound), theirs’s sound ’essentially’ like they are used to, the sound they preferred, not any noticeable alteration. Wrong Impedance/xFactor setting, we hear it right away, primarily female vocals changing.

My office Luxman SQ-N150 has built-in MC and MM. Sounds darn nice! I have two MM I play on my TT here, I hear what I am used to hearing downstairs.

I had tried a few Phono Stages, internal riaa, into Line, didn’t like anything except a $14. Pyle.

Cambridge Duo, sent it back, two others highly recommended, sent them back.

It’s the RIAA that sound different, not the transformers in my experience.

Tell me I’m/we are deaf, we can hear differences between cartridges, but me: not ...... fuses.

Phono Stages, with their own SUT within, AND their own RIAA Phono Stage Within, now you’ve got to get your ears polished.

I have personally tried lots of combinations with the Hana ML and Hana Umami Blue and Red.  1:20 is perfect if you set your phono to 40dB and 47k ohms.  If you have a Hana SL, then 1:10 is the best match.

;-) Then i would recommend an Entre w Tamura transformers… $400-550 ish… u can flip it for about same…

@billstevenson Agree. I don't want this to turn into a debate on whether one is necessary or sounds different or not, since I'm a pretty firm believer in having to use my own ears to determine that. Even in my own system, what is perceptable to me might not be for others (and visa versa!). I merely want to explore what they have to offer, if anything, beyond the built-in SUT in my MW.

This also brings me to consider, even if I reach out to MW about having something different installed, I have absolutely no clue or reference point on whether anything else would sound different, so it could turn into an expensive back and forth endeavor. It might be better to first experiment with different outboard SET options and if there is one that I like more than the build-in, then I could discuss with MW to see if there is an option to replace.

I may not even perceive any difference on trying one, but mostly just wanted some guidance on how to go about matching with my components and some recommended options to try out.

@tomic601 Sure, but tubes last significantly longer and are significantly cheaper (unless you've got a PSET 300B or something). Cartridges last about 1-2 years max with me as I play quite a bit of records, so the recurring cost there is much more frequent and a lot more expensive. That's all.

@czarivey Sure, and I could probably get a bigger improvement by replacing all of my gear entirely with different, more expensive things, but that's not really the point of this thread. 😂 I'm just curious about SUT options is all, and like Bill touched on in his comment - add 'another tool to the toolbox.' If I try a few and can perceive absolutely no difference, then that'll be the end of that.

@czarivey Thank You for your input, it does seem the Math is your Governor and the effect of the Sound produced on the individual is to be disregarded.

Such a stance sounds very very 80's when the upcoming of todays Super Brands were taking the Old Guard On, when the mantra was the Customers did not know how to listen, these are the very best products and customers are failing to appreciate them, as they don't know how to listen.

All was marketing spiel, one likes what they like. 

My response to those who believe in the Math only is one of my favourites.

You are welcome to disregard it, you seem pretty adept at that one,

 "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which can not fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

Some of the very best EE Designer / Builders do the math religiously and get the Oscilloscope to present a beautiful wave. Then the same EE will spend a very long period Voicing the Design, as the Math does only so much.

For the user of a SUT, it is a means to use a LOMC Cartridge and for those in the know, is also a means to Voicing a Cart'>Phon.    

I don’t know a TON about SUTs, but I’d like to experiment to see if adding one will enhance my experience.

I almost know NOTHING about SUTs, but all I know that either higher output cartridge or higher gain phonostage will outperform combination with SUT.

All you have to remember is the rule of number of components in the signal path. With SUT it's more components than without. Simple math there no science needed. 

@billstevenson is 200% correct, but use bad A fantastic low capacitance cables and keep connectors very clean… which is also why the OP should contact the MOD at Modwr@lewm good idea.

As to a cartridge as a consumable…. yep, no kidding as are all your tubes…. just part of the journey……

I really hope my surviving kin don’t engrave “ here lies a frugal phono cartridge spendthrift “…. on my tombstone…..

SUTs are like seasoning on food.  They definitely change the sound, it is silly to think they don't.  Silver wire sounds different than copper, the core material matters, how they are wound etc. also matters.  They are not everyone's cuppa.  No matter.  Everyone should make up their own mind based on their own experience. They work better with some phono stages than others, some cartridges than others.  They are just another tool in the box.  No more, no less.  Best to keep an open mind.