View Full Version : Comparing SUTs
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 09:52
I have not been entirely happy with my Ortofon ST-80SE SUT, which is (in theory) optimised for an Ortofon cartridge loaded at 100 ohms, but not so good for my Benz which likes a higher loading of around 300 ohms. So, I have started looking at alternatives that will better suit both cartridges, starting with an Audio Note AN-S3H, which has a tad lower gain, and which (in theory) loads the Benz correctly.
The AN-S3H is brand new, but nevertheless is clearly in a different league to the Ortofon. Tonally there is not much in it, but musical flow and other indefinables such as 'space' are way better than the Ortofon. Swapping back to the Ortofon after the AN-S3H results in a sound where the music becomes relatively mechanical and uninteresting. The Ortofon is still quite good by any standard, but not in this company.
That was with the Benz, so I brought the Kontrapunkt B out, expecting it to be a poor match with the AN-S3H. But no! The same characteristics and differences heard with the Benz are replicated with the Ortofon.
So, on one hand I'm pleased that my impressions of the ST-80SE are borne out by this comparison, but I don't yet know whether I can afford the AN-S3H! At least I know more or less what I need and there is always the option of DIY, using Audio Note MC transformers, perhaps built into a new chassis, also to accommodate my Paul Hynes phono stage and its power supply (box reduction measures).
trio leo
13-04-2013, 10:24
Hi Hugo,
I sent you a pm, but I'm not sure if I put it in the right place:scratch:
regards Al
Interesting, Hugo. In my experience, getting the best from any SUT is *always* about finding the right cartridge that releases its full sonic potential (and vice versa), so results can be rather hit and miss. That's why I now view an MC cartridge and SUT as a single purchase, and preferably both from the same manufacturer, as experience tells me that achieving synergy there (and also with the partnering phono stage) is just as important, if your T/T is to sound musical, as achieving the same between the tonearm and cartridge.
Therefore, I'm not surprised that the ST-80SE isn't an ideal match for your Benz. For starters, as you've already discovered, the gain of the ST-80SE is higher (designed, I suspect, mainly for the ultra low-output SPU), so that will be having an effect, along with also the loading values and inherent sonic characteristics of the transformers themselves, used in both units respectively.
Have you tried the AN-S3H with your Kontrapunkt B, and if so, are the results as favourable, as they are with the Benz? I suspect not. There is no 'mechanical sound' present in my system when using the ST-80SE with my SPU Royal - quite the opposite! :)
You may just have to 'go mad' and have a separate SUT for each cartridge, lol... In all seriousness, I've long believed that if you *really* want to the job properly, then that's the only way to go!! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Riislingen
13-04-2013, 12:02
Hi Hugo,
Have you considered Bent Audio Mu´s ?
http://www.bentaudio.com/index2.html
They come with the ability to load them for different carts, with nifty terminals on top. Additionally the Bent Audio stuff is of extremely good quality - sonically as well as the craftmanship.
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 12:21
Have you tried the AN-S3H with your Kontrapunkt B, and if so, are the results as favourable, as they are with the Benz? I suspect not. There is no 'mechanical sound' present in my system when using the ST-80SE with my SPU Royal - quite the opposite! :)
You may just have to 'go mad' and have a separate SUT for each cartridge, lol... In all seriousness, I've long believed that if you *really* want to the job properly, then that's the only way to go!! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Yes, I have also tried the Kontrapunkt B, as described above. Same effect as with the Benz.
Hi Mikkel,
The problem with SUTs with variable gain and loading is that, ultimately, you're still left with the inherent sonic signature of the transformers themselves, which no adjustments to the aforementioned electrical parameters will fundamentally change...
That's what I was getting at before when I mentioned synergy. For me, optimising electrical characteristics aside, the REAL magic happens when you successfully marry the respective sonic signatures of the SUT and cartridge....... ;)
Furthermore, I'm not a big fan of SUTs that use dip switches (for adjusting variable load and gain settings), as with such breaks in the signal path, the results are audibly detrimental when one is dealing with a minute and 'delicate' signal, from something such as a low-output MC cartridge.
In my experience, hard-wiring is the way to go, with the use of a 'fixed' SUT, designed simply to optimise ONE specific cartridge, both electrically and sonically :)
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 12:28
Hi Hugo,
Have you considered Bent Audio Mu´s ?
http://www.bentaudio.com/index2.html
They come with the ability to load them for different carts, with nifty terminals on top. Additionally the Bent Audio stuff is of extremely good quality - sonically as well as the craftmanship.
I've not seen those - info on their website is rather scant, though.
Yes, I have also tried the Kontrapunkt B, as described above. Same effect as with the Benz.
Interesting... I suspect then it's a system synergy thing. Worry not, though, whatever works, works. There are no 'rules' here! :)
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 12:38
Interesting... I suspect then it's a system synergy thing. Worry not, though, whatever works, works. There are no 'rules' here! :)
Marco.
Correct. There is good reading material on the Bob's Devices website, the essence of which is not to get too hung up on impedance matching - there are other things that matter more when it comes to designing a good SUT. I do believe that there is more than a little of the 'Black Art' when it comes to designing and building SUTs, going far beyond the basic maths. Audio Note have the right touch and maybe Hashimoto do too. It's a shame that I have yet to hear an active MC device that can get close to a SUT; it's also a shame that a decent SUT costs a great deal of money.
There is good reading material on the Bob's Devices website, the essence of which is not to get too hung up on impedance matching - there are other things that matter more when it comes to designing a good SUT. I do believe that there is more than a little of the 'Black Art' when it comes to designing and building SUTs, going far beyond the basic maths.
I completely agree, and it's basically what I was referring to earlier, regarding sonic synergy. Achieving that is WAY more important than anything else. The basic maths simply relate to the electrical parameters, which as correctly Bob says, aren't the most important thing.
Quite simply, all transformers have a specific 'sound' of their own, just like cartridges do, so what matters most when buying an SUT and MC cartridge is getting both 'sounds' to compliment each other, in order to create a cohesive whole, musically. *That* is where the 'magic' lies.........! ;)
You could have cartridge and SUT that, in terms of electrical parameters, are perfectly matched, yet still end up with a disappointing sound, simply due to a lack of sonic synergy, because the inherent 'sound' of one doesn't compliment that of the other.
It's a shame that I have yet to hear an active MC device that can get close to a SUT; it's also a shame that a decent SUT costs a great deal of money.
Indeed. These days, good ones are not cheap things to make. As for active MC devices, in my experience, they simply don't compare. Every time I carry out such a comparison, the active devices end up sounding somewhat mechanical and uninteresting (there are those words again), in comparison, and I suspect that, electronically, there are sound reasons for that.
Basically, it's best to keep things simple.
Marco.
Riislingen
13-04-2013, 13:25
Hi Mikkel,
The problem with SUTs with variable gain and loading is that, ultimately, you're still left with the inherent sonic signature of the transformers themselves, which no adjustments to the aforementioned electrical parameters will fundamentally change...
That's what I was getting at before when I mentioned synergy. For me, optimising electrical characteristics aside, the REAL magic happens when you successfully marry the respective sonic signatures of the SUT and cartridge....... ;)
Furthermore, I'm not a big fan of SUTs that use dip switches (for adjusting variable load and gain settings), as with such breaks in the signal path, the results are audibly detrimental when one is dealing with a minute and 'delicate' signal, from something such as a low-output MC cartridge.
In my experience, hard-wiring is the way to go, with the use of a 'fixed' SUT, designed simply to optimise ONE specific cartridge, both electrically and sonically :)
Marco.
He should get two SUTs then :)
Joke aside, I know what you mean Marco.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Riislingen
13-04-2013, 13:27
I've not seen those - info on their website is rather scant, though.
I know it's pretty scant, that shouldn't fool you though. There is a favourable review here on AOS somewhere too I think.
At least this might solve the to cart conundrum :) keeping with the quality along the way..
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Correct. There is good reading material on the Bob's Devices website, the essence of which is not to get too hung up on impedance matching - there are other things that matter more when it comes to designing a good SUT. I do believe that there is more than a little of the 'Black Art' when it comes to designing and building SUTs, going far beyond the basic maths. Audio Note have the right touch and maybe Hashimoto do too. It's a shame that I have yet to hear an active MC device that can get close to a SUT; it's also a shame that a decent SUT costs a great deal of money.
I'm not sure I agree with that. My recent experience with how loading is applied along with compensation circuit for a SUT tells me its very important. Yes, design is everything and equally important but misapplication by only loading the secondary will give varying results depending on the SUT...I've only just come around to understanding this and secondary loading is in fact changing the performance of the SUT rather than the cartridge. Getting the loading and compensation circuit correct takes away the mystique and 'synergy' of random cart+SUT selection.
Interesting, Hugo. In my experience, getting the best from any SUT is *always* about finding the right cartridge that releases its full sonic potential (and vice versa), so results can be rather hit and miss. That's why I now view an MC cartridge and SUT as a single purchase, and preferably both from the same manufacturer, as experience tells me that achieving synergy there (and also with the partnering phono stage) is just as important, if your T/T is to sound musical, as achieving the same between the tonearm and cartridge.
Therefore, I'm not surprised that the ST-80SE isn't an ideal match for your Benz. For starters, as you've already discovered, the gain of the ST-80SE is higher (designed, I suspect, mainly for the ultra low-output SPU), so that will be having an effect, along with also the loading values and inherent sonic characteristics of the transformers themselves, used in both units respectively.
Have you tried the AN-S3H with your Kontrapunkt B, and if so, are the results as favourable, as they are with the Benz? I suspect not. There is no 'mechanical sound' present in my system when using the ST-80SE with my SPU Royal - quite the opposite! :)
You may just have to 'go mad' and have a separate SUT for each cartridge, lol... In all seriousness, I've long believed that if you *really* want to the job properly, then that's the only way to go!! :eyebrows:
Marco.
I agree with you 100% Marco.
Any SUT is, in a way, a risky choice since it has a profound effect on the cartridge connected to it so can easily sound much worse as well as much better than expected.
Getting the correct match is crucial.
One -may- luck in to a good match, either by lucky happenstance or because one actually prefers the modified sound of the nominally incorrect match, but your recommendation to choose cartidge and SUT together perfectly matches my experience too.
IMHO one can be disappointed by a "better" SUT, when a "more suitable for cartridge" SUT was what is actually required...
It shouldn't be luck given a well design transformer and careful load optimization.
Getting the loading and compensation circuit correct takes away the mystique and 'synergy' of random cart+SUT selection.
You're right to a degree, Neal, but there's more to it than that, in my experience.
Getting the loading and compensation circuit correct, and thinking to yourself 'job done', is a bit like trying to get an Audio-Technica cartridge to sound the same as a Koetsu, simply by upgrading the stylus and cantilever.
Or to put it differently, a Koetsu will always inherently be a Koetsu, no matter the electrical characteristics of the partnering SUT, as regardless of that, key components such as the generator, coil assembly, body-shell, etc, are what fundamentally gives it its 'house sound' - and so it is with step-up transformers :)
A word from Bob, of Bob's devices:
What is the difference between a Transformer and a Head-Amp: The transformer is a passive device and therefore has certain advantages over a head amp or active device, which is most likely built with solid-state electronics (FETs, i.e. Field Effect Transistors). Moving Coil Cartridges have low voltage but high current.
The transformer uses the extra current that is not needed and converts it to higher voltage to allow the cartridge to match the input of the phono preamp. Whenever you introduce something into a circuit, there is an insertion loss. Whether there is a greater insertion loss from a transformer or a head amplifier depends more on the quality of the components than on which type of step up device is used, but a well crafted SUT has fewer parts than a head amp.
Indeed, and when you get the 'marriage' right between an MC cartridge and an SUT, you can hear how much more 'correct' the sound is, musically, (especially when there's a top-notch MM valve phono stage in the equation), than it is with any active device :exactly:
My policy with vinyl replay is to minimise "insertion loss" in the system, as far as possible. Hard-wiring and keeping the component count down, but ensuring that what's there is of the highest quality, is the way to go!
More here: http://www.bobsdevices.com/sowter.htm
Marco.
I agree with you 100% Marco.
Any SUT is, in a way, a risky choice since it has a profound effect on the cartridge connected to it so can easily sound much worse as well as much better than expected.
Getting the correct match is crucial.
One -may- luck in to a good match, either by lucky happenstance or because one actually prefers the modified sound of the nominally incorrect match, but your recommendation to choose cartidge and SUT together perfectly matches my experience too.
IMHO one can be disappointed by a "better" SUT, when a "more suitable for cartridge" SUT was what is actually required...
For a change, Frank, we're in agreement! :D
Hope you're keeping well, btw.
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 15:21
I'm not sure I agree with that. My recent experience with how loading is applied along with compensation circuit for a SUT tells me its very important. Yes, design is everything and equally important but misapplication by only loading the secondary will give varying results depending on the SUT...I've only just come around to understanding this and secondary loading is in fact changing the performance of the SUT rather than the cartridge. Getting the loading and compensation circuit correct takes away the mystique and 'synergy' of random cart+SUT selection.
But Bob is very clear on his website that he does not believe in secondary loading. That he manages to get such good performance from relatively inexpensive transformers is testament to his philosophy and skills. Interestingly, I have just taken a peek inside the ST-80SE case (inasmuch as you can without dismantling it) and it does have secondary loading resistors.
I sold my Bob's Cinemag SUT in the belief that the Ortofon would be better; it is not better and I'd gladly have the Bob's back.
I hope to have another listen to Martin's Choir Audio (Hashimoto HM7) SUT soon, and that should confirm the direction that I should take.
Interesting... One of the reasons Martin upgraded his Bob's Devices SUT (with his then AT-33PTG) was after hearing my Auditorium 23 SUT (for the Denon DL-103) comprehensively trounce it, in his system! ;)
In my system, with an SPU 'at the helm', as it were, the ST-80SE trounces my old A23 (for the SPU). Therefore, I suspect it's a system synergy thing again, Hugo, rather than a 'better vs. worse' SUT situation.
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
13-04-2013, 15:50
Of course it's a synergy thing, but I'm not about to ditch any other element of my system to accommodate one component which is patently holding things back for me. The Audio Note fits the bill nicely in terms of performance; whether it does so in terms of money remains to be seen! I still need to hear Martin's SUT before rushing to any single conclusion.
Absolutely... I really liked Martin's Choir Audio Hashimotos, when I heard them with my old SPU (and turntable) in his system. IMO, a lot of Audio Note stuff is vastly overpriced! The Hashimotos could well offer the best SPPV option :)
Marco.
So how would you go about setting up correct loading on the SUT?
I have a couple of these partridge transformers to use with my 103 cart. I've not even looked into how and where to load yet!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PARTRIDGE-MOVING-COIL-MC-STEP-UP-TRANSFORMERS-VINTAGE-/380615906008?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item589e79d2d8
Details
Type 977.
6 : 1 step up ratio.
20 ohms input DC resistance.... 300 ohms impedance.
250 ohms output DC resistance.....10k ohms impedance.
Flat frequency response, across audiable range.
Mu-metal core.
Shielded, screened metal can enclosure.
So how do you go about matching them to the cart and the phono stage?
For a change, Frank, we're in agreement! :D
Hope you're keeping well, btw.
Marco.
I'm very well thanks Marco, yourself?
I don't think we disagree that much, just on why LPs sound nice! On pretty well everything else we seem to usually be in agreement...
So how would you go about setting up correct loading on the SUT?
I have a couple of these partridge transformers to use with my 103 cart. I've not even looked into how and where to load yet!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PARTRIDGE-MOVING-COIL-MC-STEP-UP-TRANSFORMERS-VINTAGE-/380615906008?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item589e79d2d8
Details
Type 977.
6 : 1 step up ratio.
20 ohms input DC resistance.... 300 ohms impedance.
250 ohms output DC resistance.....10k ohms impedance.
Flat frequency response, across audiable range.
Mu-metal core.
Shielded, screened metal can enclosure.
So how do you go about matching them to the cart and the phono stage?
Without wishing to get into a discussion on the 'philosophy' of loading SUTs Ian, I can tell you that placing a 4.7KΩ resistor across the secondary winding of your Partridge 997 transformer will cause it to present a load of 145.6Ω to your Denon 103 cartridge. This of course assumes the input impedance of the phono input of your preamp is 47KΩ.
The Denon 103 is certainly happy running into an impedance of 100 – 150 Ω, so 145.6Ω will be fine.
Nice one, Thanks Barry :)
That's made it easy :cool: :cheers:
You're right to a degree, Neal, but there's more to it than that, in my experience.
Getting the loading and compensation circuit correct, and thinking to yourself 'job done', is a bit like trying to get an Audio-Technica cartridge to sound the same as a Koetsu, simply by upgrading the stylus and cantilever.
I think you misunderstand I'm talking about application of the loading not the 'correct' loading. The compensation circuit is for the SUT ringing which has a huge impact on sound and can only be arrived at with empirical testing.
Or to put it differently, a Koetsu will always inherently be a Koetsu, no matter the electrical characteristics of the partnering SUT, as regardless of that, key components such as the generator, coil assembly, body-shell, etc, are what fundamentally gives it its 'house sound' - and so it is with step-up transformers :)
The character of the cartridge will be the character but where I'm talking about the change to the SUT.
A word from Bob, of Bob's devices:
Indeed, and when you get the 'marriage' right between an MC cartridge and an SUT, you can hear how much more 'correct' the sound is, musically, (especially when there's a top-notch MM valve phono stage in the equation), than it is with any active device :exactly:
My policy with vinyl replay is to minimise "insertion loss" in the system, as far as possible. Hard-wiring and keeping the component count down, but ensuring that what's there is of the highest quality, is the way to go!
More here: http://www.bobsdevices.com/sowter.htm
Marco.
Mystique again, it should not be a lottery given a competently design SUT.
But Bob is very clear on his website that he does not believe in secondary loading. That he manages to get such good performance from relatively inexpensive transformers is testament to his philosophy and skills. Interestingly, I have just taken a peek inside the ST-80SE case (inasmuch as you can without dismantling it) and it does have secondary loading resistors.
I sold my Bob's Cinemag SUT in the belief that the Ortofon would be better; it is not better and I'd gladly have the Bob's back.
I hope to have another listen to Martin's Choir Audio (Hashimoto HM7) SUT soon, and that should confirm the direction that I should take.
Ok not following; he says he does not believe in secondary and yet in the 80SE it is loaded on the secondary?
I think you misunderstand I'm talking about application of the loading not the 'correct' loading. The compensation circuit is for the SUT ringing which has a huge impact on sound and can only be arrived at with empirical testing.
The character of the cartridge will be the character but where I'm talking about the change to the SUT.
Fair enough, Neal. Apologies for the misunderstanding, but you know where I'm coming from.
Mystique again, it should not be a lottery given a competently design SUT.
I don't see it as "mystique", but rather common sense. At the end of the day, the most "competently designed SUT" is the one that, sonically, best matches the partnering cartridge - and the most effectively way that can be achieved is by listening to a few different ones, in conjunction with your cartridge of choice! ;)
Marco.
Sowter are just down the road from me and I have a box all ready and socketed up for a pair. Now, where did I put it?????????
I'm very well thanks Marco, yourself?
I don't think we disagree that much, just on why LPs sound nice! On pretty well everything else we seem to usually be in agreement...
I'm cool thanks, mate! :)
Yeah, I agree. I think that our views on audio would align even more once you've been here and listened to my system, and I've popped down to your place for the 'return match'... :cool:
Marco.
Of course it's a synergy thing, but I'm not about to ditch any other element of my system to accommodate one component which is patently holding things back for me. The Audio Note fits the bill nicely in terms of performance; whether it does so in terms of money remains to be seen! I still need to hear Martin's SUT before rushing to any single conclusion.
But what is 'synergy' how do you quantify it, there has to be a reason why it 'works'...
Of course, but it's not always easily definable... At the end of the day, why care, as long as it works? Your ears soon tell you when synergy has been achieved.
It's a bit like tube-rolling: why do some identical types of valves (other than the manufacturer that produced them) sound better in their intended circuits than others, even when the valves in question test identically? I contend that step-up transformers are the same. They all have an intrinsic 'sound', which can't easily be defined by measurement alone.
Maybe you techy chaps have a different mentality, though, in that respect, and like to know WHY things happen... I only care about how things sound and enjoying my favourite music at its best. I'm a simple soul :)
Marco.
So how would you go about setting up correct loading on the SUT?
I have a couple of these partridge transformers to use with my 103 cart. I've not even looked into how and where to load yet!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PARTRIDGE-MOVING-COIL-MC-STEP-UP-TRANSFORMERS-VINTAGE-/380615906008?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item589e79d2d8
Details
Type 977.
6 : 1 step up ratio.
20 ohms input DC resistance.... 300 ohms impedance.
250 ohms output DC resistance.....10k ohms impedance.
Flat frequency response, across audiable range.
Mu-metal core.
Shielded, screened metal can enclosure.
So how do you go about matching them to the cart and the phono stage?
Probably not enough gain at 1:6...
Without wishing to get into a discussion on the 'philosophy' of loading SUTs Ian, I can tell you that placing a 4.7KΩ resistor across the secondary winding of your Partridge 997 transformer will cause it to present a load of 145.6Ω to your Denon 103 cartridge. This of course assumes the input impedance of the phono input of your preamp is 47KΩ.
The Denon 103 is certainly happy running into an impedance of 100 – 150 Ω, so 145.6Ω will be fine.
HeHe :eyebrows: dont agree! with an o/p impedance of 40R its too heavily loaded at 100. Start at 220R and work upwards...
Of course, but it's not always easily definable... At the end of the day, why care, as long as it works? Your ears soon tell you when you achieve synergy.
Maybe you techy chaps have a different mentality, though, in that respect... I only care about how things sound and enjoying my favourite music at its best. I'm a simple soul :)
Marco.
Because you can drive yourself nuts with the permutations ;) and waste a huge amount of time. Theres a german (I think) manufacturer who advocates primary loading and publishes the compensation circuit required based on the cartridge impedance, I'll see if I can find it....
Edit: Ah, Dutch not German, Vanderveen: http://www.mennovanderveen.nl/mc10/mc-10-en.pdf
No worries... However, you're only driven nuts if you insist that everything in audio can be broken down into numbers!! ;)
Btw, see my edit in post #32 and the question posed therein :)
Marco.
HeHe :eyebrows: dont agree! with an o/p impedance of 40R its too heavily loaded at 100. Start at 220R and work upwards...
Not in my experience; having used Partridge and Haufe transformers.
Nor mine. I've been using various 103s for about 25 years, always loaded at approx 100 Ω, and the sound has never been anything but superb.
Why do Denon's own SUTs load their cartridges at 100 Ω if that value isn't correct?
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
14-04-2013, 07:01
Ok not following; he says he does not believe in secondary and yet in the 80SE it is loaded on the secondary?
The ST-80SE is an Ortofon product:
http://www.ortofon.com/images/stories/accessories/transformers/ST80-SE_contentImage.jpg
http://www.ortofon.com/images/stories/accessories/transformers/ST-80%20SE%20back%20white%20background.jpg
not to be confused with a Bob's devices product:
http://www.bobsdevices.com/cinemagx.jpg
Bob's thoughts on impedance and resistor loading can be read here (http://www.bobsdevices.com/Impedance.htm)
Canetoad
14-04-2013, 08:09
So how would you go about setting up correct loading on the SUT?
I have a couple of these partridge transformers to use with my 103 cart. I've not even looked into how and where to load yet!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PARTRIDGE-MOVING-COIL-MC-STEP-UP-TRANSFORMERS-VINTAGE-/380615906008?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item589e79d2d8
Details
Type 977.
6 : 1 step up ratio.
20 ohms input DC resistance.... 300 ohms impedance.
250 ohms output DC resistance.....10k ohms impedance.
Flat frequency response, across audiable range.
Mu-metal core.
Shielded, screened metal can enclosure.
So how do you go about matching them to the cart and the phono stage?
I have a DIY SUT using these Ian. I haven't tried it yet as my 103 has a bent cantilever. :doh:
I can send you a photo of the insides if you like. PM me. :)
That would be useful! Cheers :D
Of course, but it's not always easily definable... At the end of the day, why care, as long as it works? Your ears soon tell you when synergy has been achieved.
It's a bit like tube-rolling: why do some identical types of valves (other than the manufacturer that produced them) sound better in their intended circuits than others, even when the valves in question test identically? I contend that step-up transformers are the same. They all have an intrinsic 'sound', which can't easily be defined by measurement alone.
Maybe you techy chaps have a different mentality, though, in that respect, and like to know WHY things happen... I only care about how things sound and enjoying my favourite music at its best. I'm a simple soul :)
Marco.
Hi Marco, I remember driving myself nuts trying to figure out why my implementation of a 6SN7 valve stage never matched the standard plate curves and characteristics published for it, even with the same branded valve for those curves or any of the other 6SN7 I had to hand.
The fact is they never match exactly, production tolerances and small variations in design and implementation all changed the operating point. Any variations in character where swamped by the changes in the electrical operating point, now you may not be able to divorce the two if say brand x always operates at this point and brand y at another but when there are variations within the same brand all bets are off.
Nor mine. I've been using various 103s for about 25 years, always loaded at approx 100 Ω, and the sound has never been anything but superb.
Why do Denon's own SUTs load their cartridges at 100 Ω if that value isn't correct?
Marco.
Barry / Marco,
Any yet the response curve you get with a 103 clearly shows the load used during test is 1K...
A SUT is a passive device it has no 'impedance' of its own so it has to be loaded with something. A rule of thumb to minimize signal loss is to use a source to load ratio of approx 10x...at 100R the standard 103 with 40R o/p impedance will be loaded x2.5 This will do a number of things if secondary loading is used, it will knock gain right back negating the main reason to use a SUT in the first place IE: to boost the low level voltage of the cart. It will dampen down the SUT high freq. ringing and load the cart down that a HF roll off will occur in the response.
The Denon AU-S1 is an ideal match, the answer is in the spec. 1:13 ratio; will boost the 103 0.3mV up to a healthy 4mV and when used with a the standard 47K MM loading present approx 280R to the cartridge, a nice voltage ratio of x7.
I hope to have another listen to Martin's Choir Audio (Hashimoto HM7) SUT soon, and that should confirm the direction that I should take.
Just name the evening, Hugo, and I'll bring it round :)
Just awaiting delivery of this from Purite Audio (thanks Keith).
Designed specifically for DV carts between 1 and 30ohm impedence so should be a perfect partner for the 20x2.
So now we'll see what single oem synergy is all about ;)
Steve
Hi Hugo,
I've got the same cartridge as you and have just bought a Rothwell MCL which has Lundhal transformers in which are supposed to be the same as in the Ortofon.
I haven't been able to listen to it extensively to notice any weaknesses but it's massively better than the Noteworthy Stepnote that I was using. I expect it should be at over twice the price but I was surprised. Some so called improvements tend to be subtle this isn't. The Noteworthy is 1:12.9 and the Rothwell 1:20. I'll let you know if my thoughts tally with yours as I go on.
Steve
I use a 'hotrodded' Music First step-up; it was Jonathon Billington's own one. It has an even bigger version of their largest 103 transformer with new windings and is crammed into a smaller box, heavily potted to damp any vibration.
As everyone has their own take on sound quality, all I will say is that the difference between this step up and even the best in commercial products is a bit of a shock . I owned two Lundhal step-ups, and, to my ears, they couldn't begin to compete in terms of scale, bass power or detail. The gap was large, so I sold the Lundahls.
Haven't heard all step ups, of course, and there may be far better things lurking out there, but anyone in the market for something very 'serious' might ask to hear one of these beasts. Then you can decide for yourselves. It's made in the UK by nice people, and, from what I have heard so far, I think it may be among the world's very best. Certainly worth a listen. I wouldn't be without it. The 'hotrod' has the option of variable gain stripped out, but it still has six settings for impedance, which can be factory set to taste. With my Koetsu I use a 50ohm setting. As the cartridge has an internal impedance of 4ohm this seems fine.
In general, I think suts are the best option with valve phonostages.
Ammonite Audio
24-04-2013, 21:50
I have just spent an enjoyable few hours in the company of MartinT and Montesquieu (Tom). Martin brought his Choir Audio SUT, which uses Hashimoto HM7 transformers - I heard this a year or so back at Martin's place, fed tunes by my own TD124 and I already knew that it is quite special. This evening, we compared the Ortofon ST-80SE, Audio Note AN-S3H and Choir Audio SUTs, in my system (as listed in my signature below). We all agreed that the Audio Note was a clear improvement over the Ortofon, which felt a little constrained in comparison. Even having heard the Choir SUT before, I was still surprised at its superiority here - it really was a step ahead of the Audio Note and hugely enjoyable. The cat is well and truly amongst the pigeons, but I have yet to try the Audio Note AN-S3MH, which is in electrical terms closer to Martin's Choir SUT. There is no doubt at all that the Choir SUT does represent excellent value, even once import duty and VAT are added to the $ cost.
Many thanks to Martin for bringing his SUT over; also to Tom for providing his well-tuned musician's ears. It is not often that other people get to hear music through my system, so the warm words from Martin and Tom mean a great deal.
You're welcome, Hugo, and I very much enjoyed listening to your system.
Nice one, Hugo. Interesting results... I suspect that you may be about to enter Hashimoto land ;)
As a matter of interest, where's the best place to buy such devices now?
Also, which cables were used in your test between the various SUTs and your phono stage and/or preamp? I've found that the type of cables used there, particularly the length (they should be as short as possible) can make a significant difference to the sonic results obtained. The ST-80SE is particularly sensitive to this.
Martin, did you bring any of your Yannis cables along? :)
Marco.
Hi Marco
Hashimoto HM7s are very difficult to obtain individually, although one online vendor lists them. That's only half the story, though. John Parker of Choir Audio (http://www.choiraudio.com/) says that the exact build and wiring of them into a finished SUT is non-trivial in order to obtain the best results. I feel, therefore, that his SUT-H7 is the best way to experience the Hashimoto sound unless you're prepared to spend an awful lot of money on the transformers and take a chance that you can make them sound as good as he does.
I brought my Yannis cables along but we could only try the outbound link from SUT to amplifier since Hugo's Audio Note arm has a fixed cable. In fact, the difference between Hugo's Mark Grant G2000HD and my Yannis 223.5 ConnectLitz (both with WBTs) was vanishingly small compared with the other differences we heard last night. I have heard more in my own system between these cables so it's quite system dependent.
One thing is for sure: Hugo's Benz and the Hashimotos formed as symbiotic a relationship as I've heard with my own Shelter. Another fabulous cartridge and really excellent, coherent and insightful playback sound.
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the info :)
Hashimoto HM7s are very difficult to obtain individually, although one online vendor lists them. That's only half the story, though. John Parker of Choir Audio (http://www.choiraudio.com/) says that the exact build and wiring of them into a finished SUT is non-trivial in order to obtain the best results. I feel, therefore, that his SUT-H7 is the best way to experience the Hashimoto sound unless you're prepared to spend an awful lot of money on the transformers and take a chance that you can make them sound as good as he does.
So, should one wish to purchase said Hashimotos in an 'optimised package', as it were, then they can be bought from Choir Audio? How much is the SUT-H7 from there?
I brought my Yannis cables along but we could only try the outbound link from SUT to amplifier since Hugo's Audio Note arm has a fixed cable.
Cool. Can you remember which cables were used for the outbound link when the ST-80SE was used? Also, did the make/type of outbound cables remain as a constant when the comparisons between various SUTs were carried out or were different cables used when comparing one SUT to another?
I'm just trying to ascertain the likely effect of the variables present.
In fact, the difference between Hugo's Mark Grant G2000HD and my Yannis 223.5 ConnectLitz (both with WBTs) was vanishingly small compared with the other differences we heard last night. I have heard more in my own system between these cables so it's quite system dependent.
Interesting, as the sonic effect of both is quite marked in my system. I've come to realise that I much prefer Yannis' tonearm cables to his interconnects and consider the former as the more successful designs, sonically and musically.
Why I'm not quite sure, but extended listening tests have borne this out. I now use a 0.5m pair of Mark's G2000HDs (or a 0.5m stereo pair of Oyaide FTVS510, fitted with WBT 0110Ags) between my ST-80SE and Croft preamp, which in that application produce superior results to the Yannis Connect Litz.
One thing I've discovered is that using 1m long (or more) outbound interconnects of any type, with an SUT, is a sonic no-no. I can quite clearly hear the detrimental effects of the resultant signal loss. These cables should be kept as short as is practically possible. Based on what I've heard in this area I can now appreciate why Ortofon built matching SUTs into the headshells of their original SPUs!
One thing is for sure: Hugo's Benz and the Hashimotos formed as symbiotic a relationship as I've heard with my own Shelter. Another fabulous cartridge and really excellent, coherent and insightful playback sound.
Nice one. I look forward to hearing it sometime :cool:
Marco.
So, should one wish to purchase said Hashimotos in an 'optimised package', as it were, then they can be bought from Choir Audio? How much is the SUT-H7 there?
When I bought it the price was $1499, which after import duty and VAT translated to about £1400. Choir Audio are quite happy to take overseas orders and my SUT-H7 was extremely well packed. John Parker is a very nice chap to deal with and he will custom make to your order, including the type of sockets required (I went with Cardas silver plated on his recommendation).
Cool. Can you remember which cables were used for the outbound link when the ST-80SE was used? Also, did the make/type of outbound cables remain as a constant when the comparisons between various SUTs were carried out or were different cables used when comparing one SUT to another?
Yes, absolutely - everything remained consistent and we only swapped in the Yannis as a final change.
Why I'm not quite sure, but extended listening tests have borne this out. I now use a 0.5m pair of Mark's G2000HDs (or a 0.5m stereo pair of Oyaide FTVS510, fitted with WBT 0110Ags) between my ST-80SE and Croft preamp, which in that application produce superior results to the Yannis' Connect Litz.
Also interesting. I prefer the 223.5 ConnectLitz to anything else I've tried, both unbalanced (for SUT to preamp, replacing G2000HD) and balanced (all other interconnects, replacing TQ Black).
One thing I've discovered is that using 1m long (or more) outbound interconnects of any type, with an SUT, is a sonic no-no.
Quite agree, keep it short (mine are 0.6m) and I would say that the cable's shield connected with a flying lead to the earth post is also mandatory in this application. In fact, EVERYTHING to do with earthing the turntable, arm lead, SUT lead and SUT itself is critical in order to get the best SQ, as you and I have discussed before.
Thanks for clarifying the above info, Martin :)
Quite agree, keep it short (mine are 0.6m) and I would say that the cable's shield connected with a flying lead to the earth post is also mandatory in this application.
What I found is that the flying lead on the Yannis Connect Litz improves its performance, no question, but regardless, the G2000HDs (or Oyaides) were sonically superior in my system, despite not containing that feature, which again proves the fallacy in audio of applying 'absolutes'.
With regard to outbound cable length with SUTs, minimising it is fundamentally important, or even doing away with it altogether. Indeed, such were my revelations here that I'm considering having the Lundahl transformers in my ST-80SE hardwired into the valve MM phono stage of my Croft preamp. I've spoken with Anthony (and Nick Gorham) about this, and not only can it be done, but is considered a likely substantial sonic upgrade.
Aside from removing the detrimental effect of interconnect cables, it would also drastically reduce the signal path and unwanted connections, together with removing the deleterious sonic effect of the magnetic (ferrous) casing of the ST-80SE, which I suspect could be holding back the full potential of the (IMO, excellent) Lundahl transformers themselves inside....
Fortunately, as my preamp has an off-board PSU, there is nothing inside the main unit to act as a potential source of hum, should the step-up transformers be housed inside it. Anyway, the only one way to find out if this is the way forward (or not), is to try it!
In fact, EVERYTHING to do with earthing the turntable, arm lead, SUT lead and SUT itself is critical in order to get the best SQ, as you and I have discussed before.
Indeed, although there is no 'one true path' as to how that is achieved.
Marco.
although there is no 'one true path' as to how that is achieved.
It's a bugger, isn't it?
anubisgrau
25-04-2013, 08:02
if you are on a territory of cheaper SUTs, cinemag 3440 doesn't perform bad with benz ACE SL. maybe not a definitive solution but considering the price, quite musical and rounded. i've got more detail and precision from sowther but nowhere near as much as enjoyment. i think you need less forensic SUT to play with benz micro otherwise things get too sterile and boring.
EDIT: now i've read first pages of the topic so you know what i'm talking about ;)
It's a bugger, isn't it?
Indeed, which is why it pays to have an open mind and faith in your ears! ;)
Marco.
Any external cabling from a standalone SUT will add capacitance to the SUT secondary changing its response, I'm not surprised Marco has noted how sensitive cable choice is. I use Lundahls hardwired into my phono Pre and use a compensation cct to get a flat extended response. Highly recommended if the SUT can be accomodated.
---------------------------------
Posted using Tapatalk :)
The Grand Wazoo
25-04-2013, 18:32
The super short cable theory is supported by the set up that Bent Audio used with the Mu SUTs - the output cable is 8 inches long and directly connected to the transformer tap. They are the black cables in this photo, the copper coloured ones being an earth lead I made up.
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3844/imgp1686w.jpg
HELL of an earth lead, Chris :eek:
The Grand Wazoo
25-04-2013, 18:50
It was just some stuff I had knocking around at the time Martin! The earthing posts accept a banana plug with a nice tight fit so I soldered some on the ends of the old interconnects and commoned them at the other end.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.