Who will survive? One last table til I die.

Gregadd, nicely said.
.

Suttlaw, if you are looking seriously at alternative phono stages, I encourage you to listen to an Aesthetix Io Signature.

For a phono cable, I'd encourage you to listen to the Omega Mikro Ebony. It's not shielded, but if it works in your environment, I think you will be very pleased with the neutrality, speed, resolution and transparency of this cable. http://www.walkeraudio.com/omega_mikro_cables.htm


.

Ah, but the sound is "Wow" as well. When we first tried it here my wife was listening and really liked it, but we were still tuning the system and we swapped it out for a while: was she ever an unhappy camper until we put it back. Everything else we did, she kept saying: "But it's not the Omega Mikro Ebony, you've lost the magic." And she was right.
.

Suttlaw, the Omega Mikro Ebony comes as an "interconnect," there is no phono vs. line alternative in this cable. Please note that the Ebony is a more delicate cable than many people are used to handling. The design objective is to minimize dielectic so there is no sheathing to grab onto, just the woven net stocking (insulated fine copper wire) to which a bias voltage is applied. The bare conducting ribbon inside the stocking is a very thin copper foil to which a silver layer has been hand annealed, and these conducting ribbons are screwed, not soldered, to the RCA connectors. For a little extra care in handling, the sonic rewards are very high.

As to "runners-up," I'm going to ask to beg off that question. None of us can hear everything, and any discussion of alternatives will offend someone who really likes the other cable. For example, Albert Porter will tell you that he really likes the Purist Dominus cables, and that he's tried the Omega Mikro and did not think they were as good. At this level of performance, choices can become more matters of listening priorities than absolute performance differences. For me, the ability to resolve complex, large scale music, particularly orchestral, is important. I've tried other cables that sound very good on small ensemble jazz or single vocalist (in some respects better than the Ebony), but just do not continue to resolve detail well on orchestral or more complex music (like Count Basie's "88 Basie Street"). The strength of the Omega Mikro Ebony is that they sound good across that range, but they are outstanding when the music gets more complex and the demands of resolving multiple instruments and multiple musical lines come into play: this is where they clearly differentiate themselves from many other cables. At the same time, they are neutral, not at all bright or edgy (like some highly resolving cables), extremely revealing/resolving and always allow the harmonic overtone structure to come across without change or interpretation.

One last comment: Lloyd Walker makes it easy to hear these cables in your own system. If you're not completely satisfied, return them in original condition within 30-days for a full refund. He doesn't get many back.
http://www.walkeraudio.com/omega_mikro_cables.htm
.

Also if the transformer is eliminated entirely as with tube OTLs.
.

I find it interesting the we in the Audiogon community continue to participate in allowing Raul to hijack so many threads. I'm doing exactly that now by offering this post, and I plead guilty to doing so. But, I wanted to let fellow Audiogoners know that I don't plan to gratify Raul (and his multiple ghost writers) in the future by responding to his baiting. All of the threads with Raul have devolved into useless "point-counterpoint" contentions that de-value this forum and make it a less pleasant place for sharing ideas and experiences. For me, posts from Rauliruegus will henceforth fall into my "ignore" file; I find his contributions counterproductive and I do not intend to encourgage even more by responding to him.

Twl and Gregadd, I appreciate your efforts to engage in a discussion on so many of the topics being tossed out in this thread and others, but I'd also be happy if, upon reflection, you decided the "discussions" with Raul are simply not worth the bandwidth and not worth diverting the entire thread from the question originally posed. Clearly, I respect your choice to do as you wish in this regard.

Best regards,

Gregadd, I like your posts, and frequently I agree with you (and sometimes I don't :-) ). I've been doing this for 30+ years also, but it seems to me that there have been some pretty significant improvements over that time (speaker driver design is one example, phono cartridges is another).

I absolutely agree with you that we still can't measure much of what our ears tell us. While many equipment manufacturers do an excellent job of actually listening to the equipment they are designing and then making changes based on what they hear, I continue to be amazed at how many people do not listen. For me, the adage "the proof is in the pudding" (in this case, the careful listening) has never been more true.
.

Gregadd, Hmmm... Good points, all. I do agree that the vintage system you describe would acquit itself very well against systems today. As you note, quality of materials is probably the biggest change. My "modern" preamp uses a classic audio circuit with 12AX7 tubes: biggest difference from a Marantz 7 is power supply and parts quality.

And for source material, I'm listening right now to a 35 year old piece of vinyl that sounds as good as any contemporary recording, and probably better than most.

And, I'd have to say that the system I'm listening to tonight sounds qualitatively better than any I could have assembled 20-30 years ago, but the cause for that is mostly in execution of the design, not new design, and quality of materials, not the result of anything radically new.
.

Gregadd, yes it's hard to ignore the bait. If you haven't already done so, read Sbank's post from today: Raul's MADLIB

That pretty well captures the essence of every thread. No need to have to read others, just bookmark this one and refresh your recollection of how these play out.
.